Chattisgarh High Court
Shubham Shukla vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 23 August, 2022
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
Order Sheet
CRA No. 355 of 2021
• Shubham Shukla S/o Harishchandra Shukla, Aged About 26 Years R/o Village -
Jagatpur, Police Station - Utran, District - Allahabad, Uttar Pradesh.
---- Appellant
Versus
• State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station - Bemetara, District - Bemetara,
Chhattisgarh.
---- Respondent
CRA No. 360 of 2021
• Pankaj Singh S/o Shrinath Singh Aged About 26 Years R/o Ashok Nagar, Ward
No. 03, Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
---- Appellant
Versus
• State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station- Bemetara, District- Bemetara,
Chhattisgarh.
---- Respondent
CRA No. 369 of 2021
• Dheeraj Kumar Singh S/o Vijay Bahadur, Aged About 26 Years R/o Katkinar,
P.S. Navanagar, District Buxar Bihar.
---- Appellant
Versus
• State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Bemetara, District Bemetara,
Chhattisgarh.
---- Respondent
CRA No. 373 of 2021
• Ajmer Singh S/o Kanshiram Singh Aged About 48 Years R/o Village Jora, Police
Station Jora, District Muraina, Madhya Pradesh.
---- Appellant
Versus
• State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Bemetara, District Bemetara
Chhattisgarh.
---- Respondent
23/08/2022 Ms. Sharmila Shinghai, Senior Advocate with Mr. Kanwaljeet
Singh Saini, Mr. Sushil Dubey, Advocate, Mr. Aman Upadhyay,
Advocate and Mr. Vikash Pradhan, counsel for the respective
appellants.
Mr. Alok Nigam, G.A. for the State.
Heard on I.A. Nos.01/2021, which are applications for
suspension of sentence and grant of bail.
By the impugned judgment dated 09.02.2021 passed by
learned Special Judge (N.D.P.S.) Act, Bemetara, District - Bemetara
(C.G.) in Special Case (NDPS) No. 22/2018, whereby the appellants
have been convicted and sentenced as under:
Conviction Sentence
Under Section 20(b)(ii) R.I. for 10 years with fine of Rs.
(c) of the NDPS Act 1,00,000/- and on default of payment
of fine amount additional R.I. for 2
years.
Learned counsel for the appellants submit that the appellants
are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the case and even
the mandatory procedure prescribed in the Act has not been
followed during investigation. They further submit that both the
independent seizure witnesses namely Rajesh Verma (PW-2) and
Manoj Yadav (PW-3) have been examined before the trial Court and
they denied the seizure of the said cannabis from the possession of
the appellants. They also submit that the disposal of this appeal is
likely to take some time, therefore, they may be enlarged on bail.
Learned counsel have placed their reliance on the judgments of this
Court in the matters of State of Chhattisgarh vs. Devendra
Singh, passed in CRMP No. 858/2021 and Riyasat Ali Vs. State of
Chhattisgarh, passed in the CRA No. 1015/2019.
On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail
applications and submits that all the mandatory provisions have
been complied.
Heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the
record.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the
nature and quality of evidence available on record, the applications
are allowed and it is directed that the substantive jail sentence
imposed upon the appellants shall remain suspended and they shall
be released on bail on their executing a personal bond for a sum of
Rs. 50,000/- each, with one local surety for the like sum to the
satisfaction of the trial Court for their appearance before the
Registry of this Court on 28th September, 2022. They shall
thereafter appear before the concerned trial Court on a date to be
given by the Registry of this Court and thereafter, continue to
appear before the trial Court on all such subsequent dates as are
given to them by the said Court till disposal of this appeal.
List this case for final hearing in its due course.
Certified copy as per rules.
Sd/-
(Rajani Dubey)
Judge
H.L. Sahu
