Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 793 (RAJ)

Ajay Singh v. State, Through PP

2019-03-08

VIJAY BISHNOI

body2019
JUDGMENT 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Public Prosecutor and also perused the material on record. 2. The petitioners have been arrested in FIR No. 137/2018 of Police Station Chhoti Sadari, District Pratapgarh for the offences punishable under Sections 8/15 NDPS Act. They have preferred these bail applications under Section 439 Cr.P.C. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that after rejection of the second bail applications of the petitioners Ajay Singh and Rajeev Kumar, statement of the Investigating Officer has been recorded as PW-1. 4. It is argued that as per the prosecution story, 420 kgs 700 gms of poppy husk have been recovered from the possession of main accused persons namely Daya Ram and Jai Prakash, which they were transporting in Truck No. RJ31GA 3747 on 2.08.2018. It is alleged that the recovered poppy husk was provided to the main accused persons by some unknown persons at the instructions of petitioners and two other persons namely Rohitash and Vinod Kumar. Learned counsel has submitted that as a matter of fact, the police had failed to collect any evidence, direct or indirect, to connect the petitioners and Rohitash and Vinod Kumar with the commission of crime except the information supplied by the main accused persons Daya Ram and Jai Prakash during the course of interrogation. Learned counsel has also submitted that the Investigating Officer PW-1 in his statement recorded before the trial court has categorically admitted that except the information provided by the main accused persons Daya Ram and Jai Prakash, no other evidence, direct or indirect, is collected by the police which connect the petitioners with commission of crime. It is also submitted that though the Investigating Officer has stated that call details of the petitioners and two other persons Rohitash and Vinod are available on record, but the same have not been exhibited nor relied upon by the Investigating Officer. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners has therefore argued that from the material collected by the police and the statement of the Investigating Officer, it is clear that no direct or indirect evidence is available on record to connect the petitioners with commission of crime except the information supplied by the main accused persons during the police custody and it is settled preposition of law that the said information or evidence is not admissible in evidence. It is submitted that in the light of the above facts, it will be very difficult for the prosecution to prove charge for the offence punishable under Section 8/15 of the NDPS Act against the petitioners. 6. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed these bail applications. 7. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and after taking into consideration the fact that in the statement of the Investigating Officer PW-1 recorded before the trail court, except the information supplied by the main accused persons, from whom the narcotic contraband was recovered, no other direct or indirect evidence has been collected by the police during the course of investigation, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I deem it just and proper to grant bail to the accused petitioners under Section 439 Cr.P.C. 8. Accordingly, these bail applications filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. are allowed and it is directed that petitioners Ajay Singh S/o Shri Om Prakash Jat and Rajeev Kumar S/o Shri Sahib Ram Jat shall be released on bail in connection with FIR No. 137/2018 of Police Station Chhoti Sadari, District Pratapgarh provided each of them 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.