SANJAY DAS Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is the third bail application under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C. The petitioner was arrested in connection with FIR No. 310/2017, Police Station Bilara, District Jodhpur for the offence under Sec. 8/15 of NDPS Act.

(2.) The second bail application filed by the petitioner was dismissed on 21/8/2018 as not pressed with liberty to file fresh after recording of the statement of the Investigating Officer. Now, the Investigating Officer has been examined before the trial court as PW-1.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner states that at the time of recovery, no one was present on the place of occurrence and the petitioner was arrested after two and half months of the alleged recovery merely on the ground that his presence is shown near the place of occurrence in the call details. Learned counsel submits that there are major contradictions in the statement of Investigating Officer. It is contended that the Investigating Officer admitted in his statement that he has not obtained any certificate, which is required under Sec. 65-B of Indian Evidence Act. He also admitted that he does not know the name of that person who gave the call details. Learned counsel further argued that upon the perusal of the challan papers, it is revealed that the name of the computer operator from whom the Investigating Officer obtained the call details is not mentioned. The Investigating Officer also admitted that he did not make enquiry regarding the recovered mobile whether it belongs to petitioner or not. In these circumstances, it is prayed that the petitioner may be released on bail during the trial.