Tarun Nayak vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2025 Latest Caselaw 1423 Chatt

Chattisgarh High Court

Tarun Nayak vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 24 January, 2025

                                        1




             HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

                               CRA No. 1857 of 2024
 1. Tarun Nayak, S/o Duryodhan Nayak, Aged About 42 Years, R/o Tedapali,
     P.S. Khoksara, District Kalahandi, Odisha.
 2. Antram Nayak, S/o Nathuram Nayak, Aged About 45 Years, R/o Behra,
     P.S. Khoksara, District Kalahandi, Odisha.
                                                                    ... Appellants
                                     versus
 •   State Of Chhattisgarh, Through Station House Officer, Police Station
     Devbhog, District Gariyaband, Chhattisgarh.
                                                                   ... Respondent

(Cause title taken from Case Information System)

Order Sheet

24/01/2025 Mr. Vikash Pradhan, counsel for the appellants.

Mr. Keshav Prasad Gupta, G.A. for the State/respondent.

Heard on admission.

Admit.

Issue notice to the respondent.

Learned State counsel accepts notice on behalf of the

State/respondent, therefore, issuance of notice to it, is dispensed

with.

Also heard on I.A. No.1/2024, application under Section 430

(2) of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for suspension of

sentence and grant of bail.

By the impugned judgment of conviction and order of

sentence dated 17.09.2024 (Annexure-A/1) passed by the learned

Special Judge (N.D.P.S. Act), Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) in

Special Criminal Case (N.D.P.S. Act) No.251/2023, each of the

appellant has been convicted and sentenced as under :-

    S.No.        Conviction                   Sentence
     01.    U/s.     20(b)(ii)(B) R.I. for 10 years with fine of
            NDPS Act, 1985        Rs.1,00,000/- and in default
                                  of payment of fine, additional
                                  R.I. for 2 years.

Learned counsel for the appellants submits that independent

witnesses of search and seizure have turned hostile. He further

submits that conviction has been made only on the basis of

deposition of the investigating officer. It is further submitted that

mandatory compliance of provisions of NDPS Act has not been

made, therefore, he prays that application for suspension of

sentence of the appellants may be allowed and sentence may be

suspended till the decision of this appeal.

Per contra, learned State counsel submits that all the

mandatory procedure has been followed and the impugned

judgment has been passed on well appreciation of evidence,

therefore, application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to

the appellants is liable to be dismissed.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

record carefully.

Taking into consideration the deposition of PW-16, who is

investigating officer and their official witnesses, who have supported

the case of prosecution and no lacuna in investigation has been

pointed out by the counsel for the appellants, hence, I do not feel

inclined to allow the application for suspension of sentence and

grant of bail to the appellant, at this stage.

In view of above, I.A. No.1/2024, application under Section

430 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for suspension

of sentence and grant of bail to the appellant is rejected.

List this matter after two weeks for final hearing.

Sd/-

(Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge

Digitally signed by AVANISH AVANISH KUMAR KUMAR PATHAK PATHAK Date:

2025.01.25 12:45:20 +0530