Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 862 (MP)

Hema v. State of M. P.

2014-07-22

G.S.SOLANKI

body2014
JUDGMENT 1.This is the first bail application filed by the applicant under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail. 2. The applicant apprehends her arrest in connection with Crime No. 239 of 2014 registered at P.S. Nishantpura, District Bhopal for the offences punishable under Sections 8/20 of the NDPS Act. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that as per prosecution, 19 Kgs of contraband (ganja) said to have been seized from the possession of Bhaiya @ Rafiq and 15 kgs of contraband (ganja) said to have been seized from the possession of Nitesh Kushwaha. Only allegation against this applicant that in their memorandum statement, they have stated that they carrying this contraband (ganja) for this applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that statement recorded under Section 27 of the Evidence Act is not admissible against this applicant. Contraband has already been seized. 4. Nothing is required to be seized for her possession. She is ready to co-operate in the investigation and trial. It is, therefore, prayed that the applicant be released on anticipatory bail. 5. Learned counsel for State has opposed the application. 6. On due consideration of the contention raised by the learned counsel for the parties and overall facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the considered view that it is a fit case to release the applicant on anticipatory bail. 7. Therefore, without commenting on the merits of the case, this application is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond in a sum of Rs. 30,000/- (Rs. Thirty Thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of arresting officer. 8. The applicant is directed to join the investigation immediately and fully co-operate with the investigation. She shall further abide by the other conditions enumerated in sub-section (2) of Section 438 of Cr.P.C. 9. In view of the ratio laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others, JT 2010 (13) SC 247, this order shall remain in force till the end of the trial. Certified copy as per rules.