Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2025 DIGILAW 1140 (RAJ)

Ismail Ajmeri v. State of Rajasthan

2025-04-22

KULDEEP MATHUR

body2025
ORDER : 1. These second bail applications under Section 439 of Cr.P.C . (483 of BNSS) have been filed by the petitioners who have been arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.76/2024 registered at Police Station Sadar Nimbahera, District Chittorgarh, for the offences under Sections 8/15, 25 and 29 of the NDPS Act. 2. The first bail applications filed on behalf of the petitioners were dismissed by this Court while granting them liberty to file fresh bail application(s) after recording of the statements of the Investigating Officer as well the witness-Rohit Mali. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioners have been implicated in the present case solely on the basis of suspicion as well as the disclosure statements of the co-accused Baljinder Singh as well as Narvel Singh from whose conscious possession contraband (poppy husk/straw) weighing 22 quintals and 21.700 kgs. has been recovered. 4. Drawing attention of the Court towards the challan papers as well as the statements of the witness Rohit Mali recorded under various Sections of Cr.P.C ., learned counsel submitted that the petitioners have been implicated in the present case on the basis of certain whatsapp calls exchanged between the petitioners as well as the co-accused-Baljinder Singh and Narvel Singh. Learned counsel further submitted that it is the case of the prosecution that on 26.07.2023, the petitioner- Aditya had borrowed the mobile phone of the witness Rohit Mali for inserting his sim therein and after getting the whatsapp account associated to that sim number created in that phone, had removed the sim from it. Learned counsel submitted that the witness Rohit Mali has not supported the prosecution story and has turned hostile during the course of trial. Learned counsel further contended that apart from the disclosure statements of the co-accused as well as the petitioners, there is no evidence worth a mention available on record in form of call details or transcript thereof to indicate the complicity of the petitioners in commission of the alleged crime. It was also contended that the case of the present petitioners is not distinguishable from that of the co-accused Mubarik Ajmeri (S.B. Criminal Misc. 2 nd Bail Application No.8898/2024) who has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 05.03.2025. 5. It was also contended that the case of the present petitioners is not distinguishable from that of the co-accused Mubarik Ajmeri (S.B. Criminal Misc. 2 nd Bail Application No.8898/2024) who has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 05.03.2025. 5. Lastly, learned counsel submitted that the petitioners are in judicial custody; the petitioners do not have any criminal antecedents; and the trial of the case will take sufficiently long time, therefore, the benefit of bail may be granted to the accused-petitioners. 6. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application. However, he was not in a position to refute the fact that the co-accused Mubarik Ajmeri has already been enlarged on bail by this Court. 7. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record. 8. Having considered the rival submissions, facts and circumstances of the case so also having perused the statements of the I.O. (PW.2) as well as those of the witness Rohit Mali (PW.1) recorded during the course of trial before the competent criminal Court, this Court prima facie finds that in the present case, the contraband (poppy husk/straw) weighing 22 quintals and 21.700 kgs. was recovered from the conscious possession of the co- accused Baljinder Singh and Narvel Singh. Further, they were found to be in touch with the petitioner- Ismail as well as co- accused Bhaga Singh through whatsapp calls. The prosecution has tried to establish a link between the present petitioners as well as the co-accused on the basis of the statements of witness Rohit Mali recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C . wherein he had deposed that he knew the petitioners who had come to meet him and also had used his phone for creating whatsapp account, however, the witness Rohit Mali during the course of trial has denied having any acquaintance with the present petitioners and has been declared hostile. 9. wherein he had deposed that he knew the petitioners who had come to meet him and also had used his phone for creating whatsapp account, however, the witness Rohit Mali during the course of trial has denied having any acquaintance with the present petitioners and has been declared hostile. 9. Upon a perusal of the statements of the Investigating Officer Ram Sumer (PW.2), this Court prima facie finds that the I.O. during his statements recorded in trial has clearly stated that there is no information recorded at the instance of the petitioners that they were in contact with the co-accused of the case and apart from the disclosure statements of the co-accused and that of the petitioners themselves and the statements of witness Rohit Mali, there is no other direct evidence indicating the connection between the co-accused as well as the petitioners. 10. The relevant portion of the statements of witness Rohit Mali (PW.1) as well as the statements of the I.O. (PW.2) are reproduced below:- 11. Thus, in light of the aforesaid discussion, this Court prima facie finds that apart from the disclosure statements of the petitioners themselves as well as those of the co-accused of the case, there is no other direct evidence available on record, prima facie indicating the involvement of the petitioners in commission of the alleged crime. Therefore, without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail. 12. Consequently, these bail applications under Section 439 of Cr.P.C . (483 of BNSS) are allowed. It is ordered that the accused- petitioners namely (1) Ismail Ajmeri S/o Noor Mohammad Ajmeri and (2) Aditya S/o Manohar Lal Jain arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.76/2024 registered at Police Station Sadar Nimbahera, District Chittorgarh, shall be released on bail, if not wanted in any other case, provided each of them furnishes a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- and two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each, to the satisfaction of learned trial court, for their appearance before that court on each & every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till completion of the trial. 13. It is however, made clear that findings recorded/observations made above are for limited purposes of adjudication of bail application. The trial court shall not get prejudiced by the same. 14. A copy of this order be placed in each file.