Chattisgarh High Court
Macho @ Nanu Nishad vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 20 February, 2023
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
MCRC No. 609 of 2023
• Macho @ Nanu Nishad S/o Babloo Nishad Aged About 21 Years R/o Amraiya
Chowk, Chingrajpara, Bilaspur, Tahsil And District - Bilaspur (C.G.)
---- Applicant
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station -
Sarkanda, District - Bilaspur (C.G.)
--- Respondent
Mr. Prakant Sethi, counsel for the applicant.
Mr. Vinod Tekam, PL for the State/respondent.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput
Order On Board
20/02/2023
The applicant has preferred the second bail application under Section
439 of CrPC for grant of regular bail as he is in jail since 18.07.2022 in
connection with Crime No.812/2022 registered at Police Station- Sarkanda,
District Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 21, 22 of the
NDPS Act. Earlier his first bail application was dismissed as withdrawn with
liberty to revive after seizure witnesses are examined passed in MCRC
No.8475 of 2022 vide order dated 12.10.2022.
2. Case of prosecution in brief, is that on the basis of secret information
police has seized Jet cough syrup of total 58 pieces each containing 100 ml
from the possession of present applicant. Therefore, FIR has been lodged.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not
committed any offence and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further
submits that the seizure witnesses have not supported the case of the
prosecution and have declared hostile and there is no antecedent of the
applicant. He further submits that the co-accused has already been granted
bail by this Court vide order dated 07.02.2023 passed in MCRC No. 151 of
2023 and he is in jail since 18.07.2022, trial is not concluded as yet, charge-
sheet has been filed, therefore, he may be released on bail. He further relied
upon the judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Sanjeet
Kumar Singh @ Munna Kumar Singh Vs. State of Chhattisgarh1.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail
application and submits that looking to the allegations against the present
applicant and quantity so seized is in the commercial quantity, therefore, his
bail application may be rejected.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and considered their rival
submissions.
6. Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case,
looking to the detention period; trial may take some time; charge-sheet has
been filed and seizure witnesses have not supported the case of prosecution;
co-accused has already been granted bail by this Court and also in view of
Judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sanjeet Kumar Singh @
Munna Kumar Singh (Supra), 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.50,000/- with one solvent surety for the like amount to the
satisfaction of the concerned trial Court. He 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
1 2022 SCC Online SC 1117
application regarding cancellation of bail of the applicant in the event of
applicant involving himself in similar offence in future and violate if any of the
conditions. It is also made clear that applicant shall not meet with any of the
prosecution witnesses till trial is concluded.
Certified copy as per rules.
Sd/-
( Sachin Singh Rajput )
Judge
Pawan
