PUROSHOTTAM Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor for State and also perused the material on record.

(2.) This is second bail application filed by the petitioner on the ground that the investigation is complete and the challan in this case had been filed on 12.10.2007. The earlier bail application filed by the petitioner was withdrawn at that stage, on 29.09.2007.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no offence is made out against the petitioner. He has further submitted that the petitioner has been illegally implicated in this case, without there being any legal evidence against him. He has relied upon the cases reported in 2007 R.C.C. (Supreme Court) 825 and 2007 R.C.C. (Supreme Court) 248. He has also submitted that the conclusion of the investigation agency itself, as against the petitioner, is under Sec. 8/29 of the NDPS Act, whereas the main accused is Dinesh @ Bablu, who was caught on the spot and from whom the contraband was recovered. He has been charged for the offence under Sec. 8/21 of the NDPS Act.