Chattisgarh High Court
Anil Ram vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 6 February, 2023
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
MCRC No. 5322 of 2022
1. Anil Ram S/o Birendra Ram Aged About 21 Years R/o Village
Buluatola, Bisnupur, P.S. Jadaopur District - Gopalganj (Bihar)
2. Dilip Kumar S/o Balistar Thakur Aged About 19 Years R/o Village
Awadhnagar, District - Gopalganj (Bihar)
---- Applicants
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Nagarnar,, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh
---- Non-applicant
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For Applicants Shri Swajeet Singh Ubeja, Advocate
For State Shri Amit Verma, P.L.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput
Order on Board
06/02/2023
1. The applicants have preferred second bail application under Section
439 of Cr.P.C. as they have been arrested in connection with Crime
No.0177/2020 registered at Police Station Nagarnar, District Bastar
(C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 20 (B) (ii) (c) and
27(A) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, (for
short 'NDPS Act').
2. Earlier bail application was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated
05/03/2021 in MCRC No.9513 of 2020.
3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on the basis of a secret
information received, the Police has seized 57.800 Kgs. of
contraband ganja from the possession of accused persons.
4. Learned counsel for the applicants submit that applicants have not
committed any offence and have been falsely implicated in the case.
He further submits that there are four accused persons, out of them
one accused namely Shyamgan S/o Late Bhagat Kumbhar has been
granted regular bail by this Court in MCRC No. 8213/2021 on
18/01/2022 though no recovery was made effective so far as the
present applicants are concerned immediately 57.800 Kg. of ganja
was recovered from their possession, but independent seizure
witnesses have been examined and they have not supported the
case of the prosecution. He placed reliance upon the judgment of
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sanjeet Kumar Singh @
Munna Kumar Singh Vs. State of Chhattisgarh reported in 2022
SCC Online SC 1117. He further placed reliance upon the judgment
of Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Sandeep Singh @
Sonu vs. State of Punjab in CRM-M-34488-2022(O&M) dated
23/11/2022 in which two judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
case of Gopal Krishna Patra @ Gopalrusma vs. Union of India
and Nitish Adhikary @ Bapan vs. The State of West Bengal are
also cited. He submits that they are in jail since 03/11/2020 and trial
is not concluded as yet and there is no evidence under Section 27 of
the Evidence Act against them therefore, they are entitled for grant of
bail.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail
application and submits that independent witnesses are examined
and at this stage they are not entitled to grant of bail. He further
submits that in the event of bail, local surety may be asked for and
they may be restrained from leaving the State of Chhattisgarh without
prior permission of trial Court because they belong to State of Bihar
for which counsel for the applicants does not object.
6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case
diary.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, considering the
submission made by counsel for the parties, considering that the
seizure of 57.800 Kgs. of cannabis (Ganja) was made from present
applicants, there is no previous criminal antecedent against them,
detention period and trial may take some time and also in view of
judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sanjeet
Kumar Singh (Supra), I am inclined to allow this bail application.
8. Accordingly, the bail application filed by applicants is allowed and it is
directed that applicants shall be released on bail on furnishing a
personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- each with one local surety
each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned trial
Court. They shall appear before the trial Court on each and every
date given by the said trial Court, till disposal of the trial.
9. 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
applicants in the event of applicants involving themselves in similar
offence in future. It is also made clear that applicants shall not leave
the State of Chhattisgarh without prior permission of the trial Court.
Certified copy as per rules.
Sd/-
Sachin Singh Rajput
Judge
Kamde
