AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Dinesh Mehta, J
The present bail application which was filed in January, 2022 has been listed multiple times. Learned counsel for the applicant has taken adjournment on all such occasions.
On 06.09.2022, Mr. Haniya, learned counsel argued the matter at length and when he realised that the Court was not inclined to grant any indulgence to the applicant, he sought an adjournment for a week. Considering that the counsel for the applicant is a young lawyer, the Court acceded to his request.
This Court painfully records that thereafter, nobody appeared on behalf of the applicant whenever the matter was listed (on 20.09.2022, 27.09.2022 and 11.10.2022).
On 11.10.2022, this Court was constrained to pass the following order:-
"1. No one appears on behalf of the petitioner. No one appeared on 20.09.2022 and 27.09.2022, either.
Learned Public Prosecutor informs that on 06.09.2022, this Court had heard Mr. J.K. Haniya, learned counsel for the applicant, at great length and when the Court was not inclined to grant any indulgence, the petitioner sought adjournment to complete his instructions. But, he has chosen not to appear since then.
In the interest of justice, the case is adjourned to 01.11.2022 for information.
Registry is directed to send a copy of this order to the petitioner."
Mr. Haniya appears today and informs that his client has taken away brief from him on 06.09.2022, and hence, he has no instruction to argue the matter.
Nobody appears on behalf of the applicant.
Perused the FIR and grounds taken in the bail application.
This application for bail has been preferred by the applicant under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. in connection with FIR No.170/2019, Police Station Chhattargarh, District Bikaner for the offences under sections 8/15, 8/25 & 8/29 of the NDPS Act.
On perusal of the FIR, this Court finds that 130 kg poppy straw was recovered from the applicant's conscious possession.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of this case and considering the fact that the applicant was having 130 kg poppy straw - commercial quantity, this Court does not find any reason to enlarge the applicant on bail.
The bail application is, therefore, dismissed.