SUHAIB KHAN Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This second 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.VIII(IO)01/NCB/JZU/2022 registered at Police Station NCB, Jodhpur, for offences under Ss. 8/20 and 29 of the NDPS Act. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the co-accused Mohammad Sabir (S.B. Criminal Misc. Second Bail Application No.15115/2023) has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dtd. 2/2/2024. The order dtd. 2/2/2024 passed by this Court is reproduced herein below for ready reference:

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that as per prosecution, on 7/1/2022, the SHO Police Station Kokama, Bihar on seeing suspicious activities of the petitioner and co-accused, interrogated them. The petitioner during interrogation divulged the information that the co-accused persons namely Mohit, Vikas and Fardeen had concealed about 40 kgs. of Ganja on 6/1/2022 in the toilet near sear No.72 of Coach No.7 of train No.15632 (Guwahati Barmer Express). The contraband (Ganja) was to be unloaded by them at Mokama Railway Station. However, before they could unload the contraband, they had been detained by the SHO Police Station Mokama. Learned counsel submitted that as per prosecution, on the basis of the said information of the petitioner, the train No.15632 (Guwahati Barmer Express) was searched, thereupon contraband (Ganja) weighing 42.135 kgs. in 33 packets was recovered and seized. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner, who is aged about 21 years, has been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel submitted that the contraband (Ganja) was not recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. The petitioner has been implicated in the present case solely on the basis of the disclosure statements made by him before the police officials. Learned counsel further contended that the petitioner was to receive only a sum of Rs.1000.00 from the co-accused for the said delivery of the contraband which indicates that he is not the main accused in the alleged crime but was working as a delivery boy of the main accused persons.

(3.) Placing reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Toofan Singh vs. State of Tamil Nadu reported in (2021)4 SCC 1, learned counsel submitted that solely on the ground of the disclosure statement, the petitioner cannot be implicated in the present case. Lastly, learned counsel submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 7/1/2022 and the trial of the case is likely to consume sufficiently long time. On these grounds, he implored the Court to enlarge the petitioner on bail.