Ravindra Devta Tiwari vs State Of Gujarat

1. The present application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for regular bail in connection with II­CR No.91 of 2019 registered with Gandhidham "A" Division Police Station for offences under Sections 8(c), 20(b) and 29 of the NDPS Act.

2. Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant submits that considering the nature of the offence, the applicant may be enlarged on regular bail by imposing suitable conditions. It is submitted that the application for regular bail is filed in view of the liberty reserved in favour of the applicant under order dated 29.11.2019 in Criminal Misc.Application No.19517 of 2019. It is submitted that after the aforesaid order, Page 1 of 4 Downloaded on : Thu Feb 25 01:59:07 IST 2021 R/CR.MA/11075/2020 ORDER there is no progress in the trial and therefore, the applicant, who is in custody since 23.06.2019, his bail application deserves to be considered. 2.1 It is submitted that the offence under the provisions of the NDPS Act involves only 1.460 kgm of 'ganja', which is far below the commercial quantity and therefore, maximum sentence which prescribed is up to 10 years. Hence also, bail application deserves consideration.

2.2 It is submitted that co­accused of this offence has been enlarged on regular bail by this Court vide order dated 29.11.2019 in Criminal Misc.Application No.19988 of 2019 and hence, on the ground of parity also, case of the applicant deserves consideration. 2.3 It it submitted that family condition of the applicant is such and he has four minor children and therefore, case deserves consideration.

3. Learned APP appearing on behalf of the respondent­State has opposed grant of regular bail looking to the nature and gravity of the offence. It is submitted that the applicant is having two antecedents, one being offence under the Prohibition Act registered Page 2 of 4 Downloaded on : Thu Feb 25 01:59:07 IST 2021 R/CR.MA/11075/2020 ORDER with the very same Police Station, i.e. Gandhidham "A" Division Police Station and another being conviction under the NDPS act by the Sessions Court, Badwani, Madhya Pradesh.

4. Having considered the rival submissions of the learned Advocates for the parties and having perused documents on record, from the investigation case papers, it appears that the contraband narcotic drug of 1.460 kgm was found in the residential premises of the applicant and hence, the applicant was in conscious possession contraband. The co­accused, who was enlarged on bail, qua him no antecedent is reported and he was, as per the investigation, not in conscious possession, but had supplied the contraband.

5. This Court has taken into consideration antecedents, where, in Sessions Case No.4 of 2010, the applicant was convicted by judgment and order dated 19.12.2014 by the Sessions Court, Badwani, Madhya Pradesh and that too under the provisions of the NDPS Act. The submission of learned Advocate for the applicant that the applicant has preferred appeal before the High Court of the concerned Jurisdiction, wherein he is enlarged on bail is of no consequence as the present offence is Page 3 of 4 Downloaded on : Thu Feb 25 01:59:07 IST 2021 R/CR.MA/11075/2020 ORDER committed during the period when the applicant is on permanent bail, as per the say of the applicant in connection with an offence of very same nature. Another offence registered against the applicant is with the very same Police Station, i.e. Gandhidham "A" Division Police Station being Prohibition CR No.5276 of 2013.