Petitioner is in judicial custody since 14.03.2015, he is admitted to bail on furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- with one surety in the like amount for the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court and was upheld by High Court of Delhi through the learned bench led by HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNISH BHATNAGAR in the case of KALE RAM @ KALU RAM vs. NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU (BAIL APPLN. 3045/2019) on 10.03.2022.
Brief facts of the case are that on secret information accused Raghav Sehajpal, Krishan Chand and Ram Lal were apprehended and from the possession of accused Raghav 220 gm of charas was recovered and two parcels containing 399 and 925 gm of charas were recovered from Kishan Chand and Rs. 65000/- were recovered from accused Ram Lal. Raghav Sehajpal in his statement under Section 67 of NDPS Act has disclosed the name of the petitioner and his mobile number, co-accused Raghav disclosed that he used to get the contraband through Kale Ram (petitioner) through conductors and drivers who sometimes used to give money in cash and sometimes used to deposit money in HDFC bank accounts. It is further alleged that many transactions were found to have taken place between accused Raghav and petitioner Kale Ram and accused/petitioner Kale Ram disclosed in his statement under Section 67 of NDPS Act that he gave five packets to Kishan Chand and Ram Lal with instructions to give the packets to Raghav Sehejpal.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 14.03.2015. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that co-accused – Raghav Sehajpal and Ram Lal are on regular bail. He further submitted that the petitioner did not possess any contraband, and he is charged with conspiracy with co-accused. He further submitted that the bank slips which are exhibited in the court are not bearing the signature of co- accused Raghav and different signatures are appearing on them.
Learned senior standing counsel for the NCB submits that co-accused Raghav Sehajpal on apprehension categorically disclosed that he used to get contraband from Kale Ram i.e. present accused/petitioner through drivers and conductors, and used to make payment in cash or sometimes deposit money in HDFC bank account of the petitioner. The verification of the bank account of present petitioner shows that number of transactions have taken place between both and the said fact is also corroborated through the statements under Section 67 NDPS Act of the accused persons.
As far as the question of voluntary statement of the petitioner under Section 67 of the NDPS Act is concerned, in the absence of any recovery of any drugs from the petitioner, it will be a debatable issue whether the disclosure statement made by the co-accused is admissible against the him or not.
Court in the view of facts and circumstances decides that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 14.03.2015, he is admitted to bail on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- with one surety in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court. The petitioner shall not leave the country without the prior permission of the concerned Trial Court.
Click here to read the Judgment
Judgment reviewed by – Amit Singh
