Smt. Roshni Choudhary vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2022 Latest Caselaw 6580 Chatt

                                          1

                                                                              NAFR
                 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                             MCRC No. 9009 of 2022
    Smt. Roshni Choudhary W/o Neeraj Nishad Aged About 26 Years R/o
     Village Karbi, Police Station Mau, Tahsil Mau, District - Chitrakut (U. P.)
                                                                       ---- Applicant
                                       Versus
    State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Torwa,
     District - Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh
                                                                 ---- Non-Applicant

For the Applicant                 :      Mr. N. K. Chatterjee, Advocate
For Non-Applicant                 :      Mr. Vinod Tekam, P. L.

                    Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput
                                 Order On Board
03.11.2022
   1.

The applicant has preferred the first bail application under Section 439 of CrPC for grant of regular bail as she is in jail since 10.08.2022 in connection with Crime No.367/2022 registered at Police Station- Torwa District- Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 20 (B) of the NDPS Act.

2. The case of prosecution in brief, is that on the basis of an information received from an informant Police has seized 15.550 kg Ganja from possession of present applicant and 25.770 kg Ganja from other co- accused. Thereafter, Police has registered an FIR against the present applicant.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not committed any offence and has been falsely implicated in the case. He further submits that there are two accused persons charged for the said offence, in the instant case from the present applicant 15.550 kg of cannabis (Ganja) was recovered from separate seizure memo the quantity of cannabis so seized is less than commercial quantity. He relied upon the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Amarsingh Ramjibhai Barot Vs. State of Gujarat reported in 2005 (7) SCC 550 contending that since the separate seizure has been affected, the applicant cannot be convicted for committing an offence of commercial quantity, there is no previous criminal antecedents of the present applicant, trial is not concluded as yet, charge-sheet has been filed, she is in jail since 10.08.2022, therefore, she may be released on bail. He also submits that the condition of Section 37 of NDPS Act has been satisfied and therefore there is no bar to this Court in granting bail to the applicant.

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail

application and submits that the separate seizure memo was prepared and from present applicant 15.550 kg of contraband was seized. However, looking to the quantity adding from other co-accused recovered the quantity would fall in the commercial quantity. He further submits that in the event of bail, local surety may be asked for and she may be restrained from leaving the State of Chhattisgarh without prior permission of trial Court because she belongs to Chitrakut (Uttar Pradesh) for which counsel for the applicant does not object.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and considered their rival submissions.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, considering that the separate seizure of 15.550 kg of cannabis (Ganja) was made from present applicant, there is no previous criminal antecedent of the present applicant, detention period, charge-sheet has been filed and trial may take some time and also in view of judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Amarsingh Ramjibhai Barot (Supra), Section 37 of the NDPS Act may not come as a bar, I am inclined to allow this bail application.

7. Accordingly, the bail application filed by applicant is allowed and it is directed that applicant shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with one local surety for the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court. She shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given by the said trial Court, till disposal of the trial.

8. It is made clear that the observations made hereinabove is only for the purpose of deciding the bail application and the trial Court will decide the case on its own merit without being influenced by any observation made hereinabove. It is also made clear that the State is at liberty to move an application regarding cancellation of bail of the applicant in the event of applicant involving herself in similar offence in future. It is also made clear that applicant shall not leave the State of Chhattisgarh without prior permission of the trial Court.

        9. Certified copy as per rules.                       Sd/-
                                                                     Sd/-

                                                        (Sachin Singh Rajput)
parul                                                                Judge