RAM LAL Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application for bail under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner who has been arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.14/2022/CBN/NMH, registered at Police Station CBN Nimach, for offences under Ss. 8/15 and 8/29 of the NDPS Act. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.

(2.) Learned counsel submitted that as per the prosecution, the contraband (poppy husk / straw) weighing 2408 Kg was recovered from a petrol tanker bearing registration No.RJ-34-GA-1183 and the contraband was loaded in the offending vehicle at the instance and with due knowledge of co-accused Dinesh. Learned counsel submitted that co-accused Ishak Mohammad was apprehended on spot as he was plying the vehicle. The further case of the prosecution is that the present petitioner introduced the driver of the offending vehicle ' Ishak Mohammad with another co-accused Dinesh who is a registered owner of the offending vehicle. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. Learned counsel submitted that role of the present petitioner in the present case is only to the extent of introducing co-accused Ishak Mohammad with another co-accused Dinesh. To substantiate this contention, attention of the Court was drawn towards the statement of the petitioner recorded under Sec. 67 of the NDPS Act.

(3.) Learned counsel submitted that co-accused Dinesh has already been enlarged on bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dtd. 6/10/2023 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.3746/2023. Learned counsel further submitted that the case of present petitioner is not worse than that of co-accused Dinesh, who has already been enlarged on bail. Learned counsel submitted that the contraband was not recovered from the present petitioner. Learned counsel submitted that investigation against the petitioner has already been completed. Lastly, it was submitted that no case of similar nature is pending against the petitioner. It was submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody and the trial of the case will take sufficiently long time, therefore, the benefit of bail should be granted to the accused-petitioner. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application and submitted that the petitioner had due knowledge of the contraband being transported in the offending vehicle and he has also helped co-accused persons in loading the contraband in the offending vehicle. He further submitted that looking to the seriousness of the accusations levelled against the petitioner, he does not deserve to be enlarged on bail. However, he was not in a position to refute the fact that co-accused Dinesh has already been enlarged on bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court.