It was found that the present Applicant had cultivated Ganja and in all 27 plants and Ganja were found and the weight of these Ganja was around 14 kilogram. Its value is around Rs. 28,000/-.
2. The learned counsel for the Applicant submits that the quantity seized is less than the commercial quantity though it is a bigger than the small quantity. It is submitted that the Applicant is behind bars since 7th November, 2013.
3. By way of precaution, a direction was given to the learned APP to ascertain as to whether the Applicant has criminal antecedents. She has made a statement that no such record is there against the Applicant.
4. In view of the aforesaid circumstances, this Court holds that it is not desirable to keep the Applicant behind bars till the disposal of the case, which may be filed against him. IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY (AURANGABAD BENCH)
Criminal Application No. 6416 of 2013
Decided On: 24.12.2013
Jagan Parasram Chavan Vs. The State of Maharashtra
Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
T.V. Nalawade, J.
Citation: 2014 ALL MR (CRI) 4589,MANU/MH/2753/2013
1. This application is filed for bail. Both the sides are heard. This Court has perused the papers of investigation. On the basis of specific information received by the Police, raid was effected. It was found that the present Applicant had cultivated Ganja and in all 27 plants and Ganja were found and the weight of these Ganja was around 14 kilogram. Its value is around Rs. 28,000/-. Necessary procedure was followed and report was given for registration of crime for the offence punishable under Section 20(A) of NDPS Act.
2. The learned counsel for the Applicant submits that the quantity seized is less than the commercial quantity though it is a bigger than the small quantity. It is submitted that the Applicant is behind bars since 7th November, 2013.
3. By way of precaution, a direction was given to the learned APP to ascertain as to whether the Applicant has criminal antecedents. She has made a statement that no such record is there against the Applicant.
4. In view of the aforesaid circumstances, this Court holds that it is not desirable to keep the Applicant behind bars till the disposal of the case, which may be filed against him.
5. The Sessions Court has refuse bail by holding that there is bar of Section 37 of the NDPS Act. As it is not commercial quantity, this Court holds that relief needs to be given. In the result, the application is allowed. The Applicant is to be released on bail on his furnishing P.R. and S.B. of Rs. 30,000/- with one solvent surety of the like amount. He is not to tamper with prosecution witnesses. He is not to commit similar offence.
Print Page
No comments:
Post a Comment