MAHENDRA KUMAR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

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.336/2022 registered at Police Station Begun, District Chittorgarh, for offences under Sec. 8/29 of the NDPS Act.

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

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner has been implicated in the present case solely on the basis of the disclosure statements of co-accused Prakashchandra recorded under Sec. 27 of the Indian Evidence Act. Learned counsel further submitted that apart from the disclosure statements of the co-accused Prakashchandra there is no other direct/circumstantial evidence available on record indicating involvement of the present petitioner in the commission of the alleged crime. Learned counsel submitted that the co-accused Prakashchandra (S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.12213/2023) has already been enlarged on bail by this court vide order dtd. 4/3/2024. Lastly, learned counsel submitted that the case of the present petitioner is not worse than that of the co-accused Prakashchandra, who has already been enlarged on bail. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody and the trial of the case will take sufficiently long time, therefore, the benefit of bail may be granted to the accused-petitioner.