Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2023 DIGILAW 1500 (RAJ)

Ranjeet v. State Of Rajasthan

2023-08-07

BIRENDRA KUMAR

body2023
ORDER : Mr. Birendra Kumar, J. - These Criminal Misc. Bail Applications have been brought under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. in connection with FIR No. 452/2021 registered with Police Station Pilani, Jhunjhunu for offences under Sections 8 and 20 of the N.D.P.S. Act 2. According to FIR, 44Kg of Ganja was recovered from a vehicle, on which petitioners were there. The petitioners were arrested in the case on 27.10.2021. The investigation could not be completed within 180 days, hence, the petitioners filed applications for bail under Section 167 (2) Cr.P.C. on 06.05.2022. Thereafter, charge-sheet was submitted on 11.05.2022. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the learned court below has acted against the mandate of law. As soon as the petitioners exercised their right of peremptory bail, the court below should have passed necessary order on the applications of the petitioners and should not have waited for the charge-sheet, which was filed after five days of filing of the applications under Section 167 (2)Cr.P.C. One of the petitioners is suffering from cancer. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer for bail. 5. Considering the entire facts aforesaid and illegality of the impugned order which is not consistent with the mandate of section 167 (2) Cr.P.C, the impugned order stands hereby quashed and the instant bail applications are allowed. It is directed that the above-named petitioners be released on bail in the aforesaid FIR if they are not wanted in any other case, provided that they furnish bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-five Thousand only) with two sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial court with following conditions :- (i) the petitioners shall fully co-operate in the trial, failing which, the trial judge would be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioners. (ii) the petitioners shall not leave the Country without permission of the Court otherwise it would amount to disobedience of the order of this Court and would amount for cancellation of bail.