Research › Search › Judgment

Gujarat High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 261 (GUJ)

Imran v. State of Gujarat

2022-02-11

ALPESH Y.KOGJE

body2022
JUDGMENT : Alpesh Y. Kogje, J. 1. The present application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for successive regular bail in connection with FIR being C.R. No. II/293/2019 registered with Kim Police Station, Surat for offence under Sections 8(C), 22 and 29 of the N.D.P.S. Act. 2. The previous bail application i.e. Criminal Misc. Application No. 15259 of 2020 was disposed of, as withdrawn vide order dated 16.02.2021. 3. Learned advocate for the applicant submits that the applicant is wrongly implicated in the offence, as the applicant was not caught red handed and by way of transfer warrant, the applicant is arraigned as an accused. 4. Learned advocate for the applicant states that the applicant is victim of wrong identity in view of the fact that even in the FIR, the reference is made to one Imran, who belongs to Ankleshwar, whereas the present applicant is though named Imran, but he belongs to Viramgam. 5. Learned advocate for the applicant submits that the only evidence against the applicant is the statement of co-accused, and therefore, also, the applicant deserves to be enlarged on regular bail. 6. As against this, learned APP submits that the trial has commenced. It is submitted that the investigation pertains to 60 kg of Ganja and the applicant was directly involved in the offence and there are other evidences which include the call record by which the connection of the applicant with the other co-accused can be well established. 7. The reliance placed by the learned advocate for the applicant on the orders placed at Annexure-B are pertaining to the other offences and defer on facts. 8. Having considered the rival submissions made by the learned advocates for both the parties and having perused the documents on record, the investigation pertains to 60 kg of Ganja. In so far as the role of the applicant is concerned, the applicant was in constant touch with the co-accused and one such co-accused is still absconding and is not available to the investigation. 9. From the investigation, it appears that frequent telephonic conversations have been made with the wanted accused persons using the mobile numbers of the accused persons, who were caught red handed. The mobile CDR and its certificate as per Section 65-B of the Evidence Act are on record. It is the case that present applicant viz. 9. From the investigation, it appears that frequent telephonic conversations have been made with the wanted accused persons using the mobile numbers of the accused persons, who were caught red handed. The mobile CDR and its certificate as per Section 65-B of the Evidence Act are on record. It is the case that present applicant viz. Imran Iqbal Sipahi, R/o-Viramgam, Raiyapur Road, Ta. Viramgam, Dist. Ahmedabad, who ordered the quantity of ganja was arrested in the offence being CR No. 1/2020 registered at Viramgam Town Police Station Part-B, a transfer warrant of the applicant-accused was obtained from the Court and custody of the accused was taken on the basis of the transfer warrant. Thereafter, the present applicant-accused was arrested at 21:00 hours on 04/02/2020 and upon interrogation, he stated that, he had ordered five parcels of the ganja from the quantity of ganja caught. His statement was recorded and he was produced before the court and his police custody remand was sought for 3 days, which was granted till 15:00 hours on 07/02/2020. The present applicant-accused was further interrogated and a charge-sheet was filed against the arrested accused persons on 23/02/2020. 10. It would be appropriate to give due regards to the submissions made by the learned APP bringing of notice of the Court the grim situation that is prevailing, especially in the State of Gujarat where offences under the provision of NDPS Act dealing with the drugs like 'Ganja', Charas', 'Mephadrone' and 'Amphetamine' are on huge increase and the action is taken by the Government Agency to deter the use from indulging into the activities related to drugs which include the drug dealing, drug peddling and drug consuming. 11. Though the name of the applicant was disclosed as an accomplice on the basis of the statement of co-accused still during the course of investigation, on the basis of call details record, the applicant is found to be in live contact with co-accused persons including one of the co-accused viz. Jogi, who is reported to be absconding. 12. In view of aforesaid, no case is made out to consider the successive bail application. Hence, the present application stands dismissed. Rule is discharged.