Pallavi Kurre @ Pallavi Jangde vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2023 Latest Caselaw 66 Chatt

                                        1


                                                                          NAFR

             HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                                MCRC No. 7756 of 2022

     • Pallavi Kurre @ Pallavi Jangde W/o Akash Kurre Aged About 22 Years R/o
       Mini Basti Jarhabhata, Police Station Civil Line, District - Bilaspur,
       Chhattisgarh.

                                                                   ---- Applicant

                                    Versus

     • State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Civil
       Lines, Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.

                                                                ---- Respondent

For Applicant             :     Shri Bharat Gulabani, Advocate
For State                 :     Shri B.P.Banjare, Panel Lawyer


                    Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput

                                Order On Board

04/01/2023

This is second bail application. First bail application was dismissed as withdrawn.

1. The applicant has been arrested in connection with Crime No.309/2022 registered at police station - Civil Lines, District - Bilaspur (CG) for alleged commission of offences under Section 21, 22 of the NDPS Act, 1985.

2. Case of prosecution in brief, is that from the possession of the applicant and other two co-accused, 8000 Units of Nitrazepam Tablet, 763 Unit of Raxogesic, 2 ml Ampul Buprenorphine Injection were recovered

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 mandatory provisions of Section 50 (1) of NDPS Act has not been complied with. He further goes on to submit that the seizure witnesses have been examined and they have turned hostile. The entire investigation carried out by the prosecution starting from summons to become a witness under section 160 CrPC (Ex.P-1), consent of the witnesses

(Ex.P/2), Mukhbir Soochna Panchnama (Ex/P/3), panchnama of non-receipt of search warrant (Ex.P/4, Mukhbir Soochna Tasdik Panchnama (Ex.P/5), Notice under Section 50 of NDPS Act (Ex.P/6, P/7 and P/8), Consent Panchanama for search (Ex.P/9), self and police force search panchnama (Ex.P/10), Search panchanama of police vehicle (Ex.P/11), Search panchanama of witnesses (Ex.P/12), search panchanama of suspicious (Ex.P/13), panchanama of house and carry bag (Ex.P/14), Panchanama of seizure (Ex.P/15), panchanama of identification of narcotics (Ex.P/16), panchanama of calculation (Ex.P/17), panchanama of physical verification of balance (taraaju) (Ex.P/18), weight panchnama (Ex.P/19), model sample panchnama (Ex.P/20), sealed panchanama (Ex.21), sample seal panchanama (Ex.P/22), seizure sheet (Ex.P/23, P/24 and P/25), panchanama of reason for arrest (Ex.27, P/28, P/29), Najri Naksha (Ex.P/30). The seizure witnesses have not supported the case of prosecution and turned hostile. He submits that in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, there are reasonable grounds to believe that the applicant is not guilty and he would not commit the same crime in future while on bail. He submits that the provisions of Section 37 of NDPS Act has been satisfied and therefore, there is no bar to this Court in granting bail to the applicant. He further relied upon the judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of SanjeetKumar Singh @ Munna Kumar Singh Vs. State of Chhattisgarh reported in 2022 SCC Online SC 1117.

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submits that from the possession of applicant and other co- accused, 8000 Units of Nitrazepam Tablet, 763 Unit of Raxogesic, 2 ml Ampul Buprenorphine Injections were seized and other witnesses are yet to be examined. Even assuming that seizure witnesses have not supported the case of prosecution, conviction can be sustained on the basis of statement of other witnesses including Investigating Officer. In view of above, bar under Section 37 of NDPS Act would be applicable against the present applicant.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, looking to the fact that the case of prosecution basically rests upon the statements of two

star witnesses who are the witnesses of entire investigation carried out by the prosecution and prima facie, they have not supported the case of prosecution, in view of Judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sanjeet Kumar Singh @ Munna Kumar Singh (Supra), applicant is in jail since 22/03/2022, I am inclined to allow this bail application.

7. Accordingly, this application is allowed. It is directed that he shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with one surety for the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court on the condition that -

a) He shall appear before the trial Court regularly on each and every date, unless exempted from appearance.

b) He shall not make any attempt to tamper with the prosecution witnesses.

8. It is made clear that the observations made herein above is only for the purpose of deciding the bail application and the trial Court will decide the case on its own merits without being influenced by any observation made herein above. It is made clear that the State is at liberty to move application regarding cancellation of bail of the applicant in the event of applicant involving himself in similar offence in future.

Sd/-

(Sachin Singh Rajput ) Judge Deepti