GUNJAN DUDHANI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has been arrested in FIR No. DRI/UZU/JRU/19/INI-4/2016 dtd. 26/4/2017 of Police Station Directorate of Revenue Intelligence for the offences punishable under Ss. 22(c), 23(c), 25-A, 27-A, 29 read with Sec. 2, 8 and 8-A of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and Rules 53-A, 64-A, 65-A, 66 and 67 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Rules, 1985. He has preferred this third bail application under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case only because of the fact that he is the real son of the main accused Subhash Dudhani. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the prosecution has failed to produce reliable evidence on record to suggest that the petitioner was involved in the commission of crime in any manner.

(3.) It is also submitted that the Investigating Agency has filed charge-sheet against the petitioner on the basis of statement of one of the witness viz. Rai Singh, who was the watchman of one of the factory. It is submitted that the said witness, during his interrogation by the Investigating Agency, has stated that the petitioner used to visit in the factory, where the tablets containing narcotic substance were manufactured. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that another piece of evidence available on record against the petitioner is his confessional statement recorded under Sec. 67 of the NDPS Act. It is further submitted that the Investigating Agency, without having any evidence against the petitioner, has involved him in commission of crime simply on the basis of that he used to handle the business of his father Subhash Dudhani in India as well as in Abroad.