BAGTA RAM Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant bail application under Section 439 CrPC has been preferred by the petitioner Bagta Ram s/o Hanumana Ram Saran, who is in custody in connection with the F.I.R. No.66/2019 registered at the Police Station Mangalwad, District Chittorgarh for the offence under Section 8/29 of the NDPS Act.

(2.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.

(3.) The recovery of contraband poppy straw weighing 8 quintal 39 kg 400 gm was effected from an unnumbered bus, which was driven by one Prema Ram. When interrogation was made from Prema Ram, he failed to offer any explanation for being in possession of the contraband poppy straw. He also did not name any person from whom the poppy straw had been procured. During the course of investigation, the police contacted the registered owner of the bus, namely, Laxman Ram, who gave a statement that he had sold the bus in question to one Suresh Bhai and that after the transfer, all responsibility of the bus was of the said person. Later on, the matter was given a twist and the petitioner was implicated in this case with the allegation of being the person in control of the bus in question as having been engaged to drive the same. Laxman Ram's subsequent statement was recorded by the Investigating Officer, in which he alleged that as a matter of fact, the petitioner had been engaged as driver of the bus in question and the agreement was issued in the name of Suresh Bhai Goswami on petitioner's instruction. However, the petitioner continued to hold control of the bus even thereafter. There is an apparent discrepancy in the two statements of Laxman Ram. The agreement of transfer of the bus was executed by Laxman Ram in favour of Suresh Bhai. This was precisely the reply given by Laxman Ram to the notice under Section 133 of the Motor Vehicle Act. This court is of the view that the conditions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act are satisfied in the present case.