- Bookmark
- Share
- CaseIQ
Devendra Meena v. The State Of Madhya Pradesh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND RAMESH PHADKE ON THE 28thOF AUGUST, 2025
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 34821 of 2025
DEVENDRA MEENA
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Ashish Singh Jadoun - Advocate for applicant. Shri Mohit Shivhare - Public Prosecutor for respondent/State.
ORDER
The applicant has filed this first application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. (483 of BNSS, 2023) for grant of bail.
2. The applicant has been arrested on 25.06.2025 in connection with Crime No.153/2025 registered at Police Station Dharnavada District Guna (M.P.) for offence punishable under Section 8/21, 29 of NDPS Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, 23.42 grams of smack was recovered from the possession of the applicant. The said quantity falls under the intermediate quantity as defined under the NDPS Act.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is in custody since 25.06.2025 and that the contraband recovered does not fall within the commercial quantity. Trial will take time for its conclusion. The applicant is permanent resident of District Guna and there is no likelihood of their absconsion or tampering with the prosecution evidence. He is ready to
1
abide by the terms and conditions as may be imposed. With the aforesaid submissions, prayer for grant of bail is made.
5. Learned counsel for State has opposed the bail application and prayed for its rejection. It is contended that the applicant has three criminal antecedents but the same are not of similar nature.
6. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.
7. It is not disputed that the quantity of contraband seized (23.42 grams of smack) is of intermediate quantity. The bar under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, therefore, does not apply. Though the applicant has criminal antecedents, they are not of similar nature and the trial is not likely to conclude in near future and prolonged pre- trial detention being an anathema to the concept of liberty, thus, this Court is inclined to extend the benefit of bail to the applicant. Accordingly, without commenting on merits of the case, this bail application is allowed.
8. It is directed that the applicant be released on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rs. Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court for his appearance before it on the dates given by the concerned Court.
9. This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions by the applicant:-
i) The applicant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by him;
ii) The applicants will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case may be;
2
(MILIND RAMESH PHADKE)
JUDGE
iii ) The applicant will not indulge himself in extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be;
iv) The applicant will not commit any other offence or will not repeat the offence in future. In case, if he is found involved in the offence of same nature, this bail order shall stand cancelled automatically without further reference to the Bench.
v) The applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial;
vi) The applicant will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be.
10. Copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for compliance.
11. Certified copy as per rules. ojha
3
Alert