Ravinder Nath Rai v. State NCT Of Delhi

$~3 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + BAIL APPLN. 2149/2024 RAVINDER NATH RAI ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr.Siddharth Singh and Mr.Mohammad Ali, Advocates.

versus STATE NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through:

Ms.Richa Dhawan, APP for State with SI Rajinder Kumar.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DHARMESH SHARMA

O R D E R

% 24.06.2024 CRL.M.A. 18452/2024 Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

The application stands disposed of.

BAIL APPLN. 2149/2024 1.

SI Rajinder Kumar is present, however, he has not brought the status report.

2.

Learned APP for State is present through VC.

3.

Having heard the learned counsels for the parties present, if the prosecution case is to be believed, one Rajendra Prasad Mishra was arrested on 23.03.2024, who was found in possession of 18 kgs of alprazolam, consequent to which the present FIR was registered under Section 22 read with Section 25 of the NDPS Act. During the course of investigation another co-accused namely Ramashish Maurya was arrested on 05.04.2024 from whom the consignment of drugs was The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 25/07/2024 at 12:14:38

allegedly obtained by the accused Rajendra Prasad Mishra. It is stated by the IO that as many as five accused persons have since been arrested.

4.

Insofar as the role of the present applicant is concerned, it is urged by the learned APP that he was source of the drugs that have been supplied to Ramashish Maurya. Learned APP has urged that although there is no mention of the present accused in the disclosure statements of the accused Rajendra Prasad Mishra as well as Ramashish Maurya, however, his role has come to light during the investigation on examining the Call Data Records of the accused persons. It is emphasized by the IO that as many as 20-30 calls were registered between the present applicant and the other co-accused namely, Ramashish Maurya in about a month prior to their arrest. The applicant accused is required for custodial interrogation. 5.

Having regard to the broad facts and circumstances, this Court is not inclined to grant the relief claimed. The application is dismissed.

DHARMESH SHARMA (VACATION JUDGE) JUNE 24, 2024 VLD The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 25/07/2024 at 12:14:38