Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 2411 (RAJ)

Preence Prawani v. State of Rajasthan

2019-09-09

VIJAY BISHNOI

body2019
JUDGMENT Vijay Bishnoi, J. - Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor and also perused the material on record. 2. The petitioner has been arrested in FIR No.403/2018 of Police Station Purani Abadi, District Sri Ganganagar for the offences punishable under Sections 8/22 and 8/29 NDPS Act. He has preferred this second bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that as per the prosecution story, huge quantity of drugs containing narcotic substance Tamadol was recovered by the police from two coaccused persons viz. Ramandeep Batra and Mukesh Kumar. It is submitted that during the course of investigation, the statements of co-accused Ramandeep Batra were recorded by the Investigating Officer under Section 67 of NDPS Act, wherein he informed the police that he had procured the drugs containing narcotic substance Tramadol from the petitioner by making whats app call on phone number 7836029078. It is submitted that now the statements of Investigating Officer Prashant Kaushik have been recorded before the trial court as PW-1, where in his crossexamination, he has specifically stated that the petitioner has not been made an accused on the basis of statements given by the co-accused persons viz. Ramandeep Batra and Mukesh Kumar under Section 67 NDPS Act but has been made an accused on the basis of other evidence collected by him during the course of investigation. It is submitted that the Investigating Officer has failed to point out any other evidence on the basis of which the petitioner has been made an accused in this case. It is further submitted that so far as phone number 7836029078 is concerned, the Investigating Officer has specifically stated in his crossexamination that the SIM of the above number is not in the name of the petitioner and no SIM or any mobile has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. It is submitted that from the above, it is clear that there is no evidence available on record to connect the petitioner with commission of crime. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application. 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. 5. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application. 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. 5. Accordingly, this second bail application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that petitioner - Preence Prawani S/o Late Shri Anandlal shall be released on bail in connection with FIR No.403/2018 of Police Station Purani Abadi, District Sri Ganganagar provided he executes a personal bond in a 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.