BAIL APPLICATION 57322 of 2021 on 25 September 2008

O R D E R

This is first bail application under Section 439 of the Code ofCriminal Procedure, 1973 filed on behalf of the applicant for grant ofbail. The applicant is implicated in connection with Crime No.141/2008registered at Police Station – Jeeran, District Neemuch (M.P.) forcommission of offence punishable under Section 8/18 and 29 of theNarcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. The applicantis in custody since 28/10/2021.

As per prosecution story, on 25/09/2008 police received discreetinformation from the informer regarding contraband article. Act upon the said information police party reached on the spot and recovered 03Kilogram opium from the possession of the co-accused Nandlal. Co-accused Nandlal disclosed the name of present applicant in hismemorandum recorded under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act.Thereafter, present applicant has been made accused and crime hasbeen registered against him.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant isinnocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this offence. Heis in custody since 28/10/2021. There is no legal evidence to connecthim with the aforesaid crime. Final conclusion of the trial is likely totake sufficient long time. He has been made accused only on the basisof memorandum under Section 27 of the Evidence Act but nothing hasbeen recovered from his possession. Therefore, such memorandum isnot admissible in the evidence. Bar of Section 37 of NDPS Act will notattract against the applicant. Applicant has no past criminal record andis permanent resident of Jhabua Neemuch. He is the sole breadearner of the family. Under the above circumstances, prayer for grantof bail may be considered on such terms and conditions, as this Courtdeems fit and proper.

In support of his arguments, learned counsel has placedreliance upon the orders delivered in the case of Nandkishore Vs.State of M. P. (M.Cr.C.No.39293/2021, decided on 06/09/2021),Kuldeep Vs. State of M. P. (M.Cr.C.No.59693/2021, decided on13/12/2021), Rameshchandra @ Ramu Vs. State of M. P. (M.Cr.C.No.52755/2021, decided on 11/11/2021), Bhura Vs. State of M. P.

(M.Cr.C.No.53081/2021, decided on 17/01/2022), Vijay Anjana Vs.State of M. P. (M.Cr.C.No.40117/2021, decided on 27/08/2021),Dipakbhai Jagdishchandra Patel Vs. State of Gujarat & Anr.reported in (2020) 2 SCC (Cri) 361 and Ismail Khan & Anr. Vs. Stateof M. P. (Cr.R.No.482/2012, decided on 30/05/2019).

Per contra, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent – Stateopposes the bail application and prays for its rejection by submittingthat the present applicant was remain abscond for a period of 13years. Hence, he is not entitled to be released on bail.

Perused the impugned order of the trial Court as well as thecase diary.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature andgravity of offence, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for theapplicant and also taking note of the fact that present applicant wasremain abscond for a long period of 13 years, therefore, there is astrong apprehension that if he be released on bail he will againabscond. Apart from that commercial quantity of the contraband hasbeen seized in the matter.

In view of the above, without commenting anything on the meritsof the case, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the applicant on bail.Accordingly, the first bail application filed by the applicant is dismissed.

Certified copy as per rules.

TejDigitally signed by TEJPRAKASH VYAS Date: 2022.03.03 19:01:27 -08'00'

(ANIL VERMA)J U D G E