SHIV KUMAR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Perused the complaint papers. The case has been registered against the present petitioner under Sec. 8/129 of the NDPS Act. Nothing has been recovered from his possession or from his house. He has been implicated in this case on the statement of Bhagat Singh, co-accused, recorded under Sec. 67 of the NDPS Act. Learned counsel submits that the statement of Bhagat Singh has been recorded on 12.7.97 but he has not named the present petitioner in his statement. Bhagat Singh was arrested on the same day. Thereafter, the second statement was recorded on the next day. He has also pointed out that the present petitioner was summoned, arrested and the Investigation Officer got signed blank papers on which is statement was recorded. Therefore, there is no evidence against the present petitioner that he is involved in the alleged sale of narcotics substance.

(2.) The learned counsel appearing on behalf of Union of India has opposed this bail application on the ground that the present petitioner himself has admitted in his statement that he supplied opium to Shyam Behari. Shyam Behari could not be apprehended so far.

(3.) After going through all the papers, I am inclined to grant bail under Sec. 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to the accused petitioner.