Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 227 (RAJ)

Yashwant Singh v. State of Rajasthan

2019-01-18

VIJAY BISHNOI

body2019
JUDGMENT 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor and also perused the material on record. 2. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that though the second bail application preferred on behalf of the petitioner was dismissed on 11.1.2019 only, however, in the aforesaid order, it is mentioned that learned counsel for the petitioner does not want to press the bail application and seeks liberty for the petitioner to file fresh bail application before the trial court after recording of the statement of I.O./Seizure Officer, but as a matter of fact, the statement of the I.O. was already recorded by the trial court on the date of rejection of the second bail application, hence, now this fresh bail application has been moved. 3. The petitioner has been arrested in FIR No. 177/2017 of Police Station Arnod, Distt. Pratapgarh for the offences punishable under Sections 8/18 and 29 of the NDPS Act. He has preferred this third bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that it is clear from the statement of Mangi Lal (PW-1), the then SHO, Police Station Kotwali, Pratapgarh that in this case, narcotic contraband poppy husk was seized by the police and the Seizure Officer first mixed the poppy husk on a tarpaulin and thereafter took two samples from that mixture. Thus, it is clear that the Seizure Officer did not collect separate samples from each bag. It is also submitted that the I.O. has not stated that the test by the U.N. Kit was carried out on each bag before taking small quantity of poppy husk for samples. 5. Thus, it is clear that the Seizure Officer did not collect separate samples from each bag. It is also submitted that the I.O. has not stated that the test by the U.N. Kit was carried out on each bag before taking small quantity of poppy husk for samples. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner while placing reliance on the decision of this Court rendered in the case of Netram v. State of Rajasthan, reported in 2014(1) Cr.L.R. (Raj.) 163 has argued that this Court has held that if the samples from each bag containing poppy husk/poppy straw have not been collected and test by U.N. Kit has not been conducted on each bag and if the Seizure Officer has taken out some quantity of narcotic drug from each bag and after mixing the same has taken out some portion for sample, then, the same is not in conformity with the Standing Instruction No. 1/88 issued by the Narcotics Control Bureau, New Delhi, particularly, Instruction No. 1.7 and, as such, it cannot be said that the narcotic contraband recovered in the matter is of commercial quantity or above. It is, thus, prayed that the petitioner may kindly be enlarged on bail. 6. Having considered the overall facts and circumstances of the case and substantial grounds taken in this bail application and taking into consideration the judgment passed by this Court in Netrams case (supra), this Court is of the opinion that there are rare chances of petitioners conviction and trial of the case is likely to take time, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. 7. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application. 8. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I deem it just and proper to grant bail to the accused petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C. 9. Accordingly, this third bail application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that petitioner - Yashwant Singh S/o Shri Karu Singh shall be released on bail in connection with FIR No. 177/2017 of Police Station Arnod, Distt. Pratapgarh provided he executes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- with two sound and solvent sureties of Rs. Pratapgarh provided he executes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- with two sound and solvent sureties of Rs. 25,000/- each to the satisfaction of learned trial court for his appearance before that court on each and every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till the completion of the trial.