Stenography Exercise No.5

 Legal Dictation 450 words.

Learned counsel further submits that similarly situated co-accused, namely Rahul @ Gurlal Singh, who was also nominated on the disclosure statement of accused Sarvjit Singh @ Sabli and Vipin, has already been granted concession of regular bail, vide order dated 18.02.2021 passed by a Co-ordinate Bench in CRM- M-34192-2020 noticing the fact that the challan has been presented and no narcotic substance was recovered from him and the only evidence against him is the disclosure statement of the co-accused.

Learned counsel, appearing for petitioner Vinod Kumar, 3 of 9 In virtual Court submits that after his name surfaced (100)  in the disclosure statement of aforesaid two co-accused, the petitioner was arrested, however, nothing was recovered from him. Learned counsel further submits that even during investigation, the police has taken the details of the bank account and nothing was found showing that any transaction has taken place from the bank account of the petitioner.

It is further submitted that the petitioner is a chronic eye patient and is taking treatment of his right eye, for which, he has already been operated due to loss of eye sight.

Learned counsel further argues that petitioner is in judicial custody for the last (200) about 11 months and though he was previously convicted for possessing small quantity of contraband in the year 2010, however, except that he is not involved in any other case.

Learned counsel, appearing for petitioners Lakhwinder Singh @ Lucky and Resham Singh, submits that petitioners are the brothers of co-accused Rahul @ Gurlal Singh, who has already been granted concession of regular as noticed above. It is further submitted that the case of the petitioners are on the similar footing to that of co-accused Rahul @ Gurlal Singh as he was also nominated on the disclosure of co-accused.

Learned counsel (300) further submits that the petitioners are carrying on their separate business in Gujarat and have no antecedents of involvement in any other case.

4 of 9 In virtual Court Learned counsel, appearing for petitioner Nazeem Khan, argues that the petitioner is a juvenile in conflict with law, aged about 15 years, and was a student of 7th Standard at the time when he was arrested.

Learned counsel further submits that except the disclosure of co-accused, there is nothing on record to suggest that petitioner played any active role. It is further submitted that Juvenile Justice Board as well as Additional (400) Sessions Judge have wrongly declined the concession of regular bail to the petitioner as the maximum punishment under the Act is three years and the petitioner has already undergone custody of about 01 year and 01 month and he is not involved in any other case. (450)

Stenography Exercise No.1 CLICK HERE.
Stenography Exercise No.2 CLICK HERE.
Stenography Exercise No.3 CLICK HERE.
Stenography Exercise No.4 CLICK HERE.
Stenography Exercise No.5 CLICK HERE.
Stenography Exercise No.6 CLICK HERE.
Stenography Exercise No.7 CLICK HERE.