MOHAMMAD KHURSHID Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is second bail application of the accused petitioner. The first bail application came to be dismissed as withdrawn and liberty was granted of filing fresh bail application after framing of charge vide order dated 17.08.2012.

(2.) The charge was finally framed against the accused petitioner for offence under section 8/25 of NDPS Act and as against other co-accused for offence under section 8/20 of the Act.

(3.) Counsel for accused petitioner submits that the accused petitioner has been charged under section 8/25 of the Act and against the calender of witnesses of 11 persons only four have been examined so far and he is facing incarceration almost for two years by now and he has been booked on account of his confessional statement recorded under section 67 of the Act and placed reliance on the judgment of the Apex Court in Tofan Singh v. State of Tamil Nadu reported in 2013 X AD (SC) 440 and submits that in the light of the judgment (supra) at least the confessional statement of the petitioner should not be taken on its face value and his incarceration is not going to serve any purpose as the only evidence against him, for which he has been implicated, being the registered owner of the vehicle, as alleged, used for carrying the contraband (charas) and submits that trial may take its own time.