High CourtsSingle Bench(2024) 05 MP CK 0052

Vishnu Prasad Yadav And Others vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 13 May 2024

HON’BLE JUDGES
Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 18245 Of 2024

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

11 paragraphs · 344 words

Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia, J

1.

Case diary is available.

2.

This First application under Section 439 of CrPC has been filed for grant of bail.

3.

The applicants have been arrested on 31.7.2023 in connection with Crime No.571/2023 registered at Police Station Nasrullahganj (Behrunda), Sehore for offence under sections 8, 20, 29 of NDPS Act and section 120-B of IPC.

4.

It is submitted by counsel for applicants that the applicant no.1 was found to be in possession of 50 kgs. 500 grams of Ganja; whereas the applicant no.2 was found to be in possession of 50 kgs. of Ganja. It is submitted that the applicants have been falsely implicated.

5.

Per contra, it is submitted by counsel for the State that two persons had brought the Ganja from Orissa by a train and the delivery of the same was taken by Santosh Bairagi and the applicant no.1 was in direct contact with Santosh Bairagi and on multiple occasions he had talked to him.

6.

Looking to the huge quantity and chain of supply of Ganja, which has been seized from both the applicants, who are real brothers, this Court is of considered opinion that no case is made out for grant of bail on merits.

7.

So far as the delay in trial is concerned, the applicants have filed the copies of the chargehseet of the trial court, which indicate that the chargesheet was filed on 23.1.2024 and only on one day, the prosecution witness was not present. Furthermore, it also appears that some of the accused persons also did not appear and their application under section 317 of CrPC was allowed.

8 . Accordingly, no case is made out to draw an inference that the prosecution is responsible for the delay.

9 . Accordingly, looking to the quantity of Ganja seized from the possession of both applicants, no case is made out warranting interference. However, they are granted liberty to move an application afresh in case if there is any unreasonable delay in trial.

10.

With aforesaid observations, the application is dismissed.