[Cites 5, Cited by 0]
Chattisgarh High Court
Satish Chandra Prajapati vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 19 March, 2026
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1
2026:CGHC:13192
KUNAL NAFR
DEWANGAN
Digitally
signed by
KUNAL
DEWANGAN
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 2597 of 2026
Satish Chandra Prajapati S/o Premlal Aged About 26 Years R/o Village
Kondra, Police Station-Hasayan, District Hathras (U.P.)
... Applicant(s)
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station Farasgaon, District -
Kondagaon (CG)
---- Non-Applicant(s)
For Applicants : Mr. Shreyansh Pathak, Advocate (Through
V.C.)
For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Shailendra Sharma, Panel Lawyer.
Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Order on Board
19/03/2026
1.
This is the First bail application filed under Section 483 of the
Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to
the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.
57/2024 registered at Police Station- Farasgaon, District-
Kondagaon (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 20(B)
of the NDPS Act.
2. The prosecution's case, in brief, is that on the basis of secret
information received from an informant, the police party acted upon
such information and registered Crime No. 57/2024 at Police Station
Farasgaon, District Kondagaon against the present applicant and
other co-accused for the offence punishable under Section 20(b) of
the NDPS Act, 1985. It is alleged that on 26.05.2024, the applicant
along with co-accused persons was found in possession of
approximately 110.570 kilograms of contraband Ganja, which was
being illegally transported in front of the Electricity Office situated at
NH-30, Main Road, Farasgaon, within the jurisdiction of the said
police station. On the basis of the aforesaid allegation, the present
offence has been registered against the applicant.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is
innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The
alleged recovery is planted and there is no independent and reliable
evidence connecting the applicant with the contraband. It is further
submitted that the mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act have not
been complied with and the alleged search and seizure were
conducted in violation of statutory safeguards, rendering the
recovery doubtful. No independent witness has supported the
prosecution case and the seizure witnesses have either turned
hostile or are interested witnesses. The prosecution has failed to
establish conscious and exclusive possession of the alleged
contraband. It is further submitted that the applicant is in judicial
custody since 26.05.2024 and the trial is progressing at a very slow
pace, as out of 17 prosecution witnesses only 4 have been examined
so far and there is no likelihood of early conclusion of trial. In the
present case, the charge-sheet has already been filed before the
competent Court and the applicant has no criminal antecedent.
Therefore, continued detention of the applicant would amount to pre-
trial punishment and would be violative of Article 21 of the
Constitution of India. Hence, it is prayed that the applicant be
enlarged on bail.
4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for
grant of bail and submits that the applicant is involved in a serious
offence under the NDPS Act involving commercial quantity of
contraband, i.e., approximately 110.570 kilograms of Ganja, which is
much above the prescribed commercial quantity. It is further
submitted that there is sufficient material available on record against
the applicant and the mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act have
been duly complied with during search and seizure. Considering the
nature and gravity of the offence as well as the huge quantity of
contraband involved, the applicant is not entitled to be released on
bail. Hence, the prayer for bail deserves to be rejected.
5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused
the case diary.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and
gravity of the offence levelled against the applicant and the fact that
the quantity of contraband, i.e., approximately 110.570 kilograms of
Ganja, said to have been recovered from the possession of the
applicant along with other co-accused, is much above the prescribed
commercial quantity, this Court is of the opinion that the grounds
raised by learned counsel for the applicant are not sufficient to grant
bail. The submission that out of 17 prosecution witnesses, 4
witnesses have been examined and that some of the material and
seizure witnesses have turned hostile does not, at this stage,
demolish the prosecution case. Further, the fact that the applicant is
in custody since 26.05.2024 also does not constitute a sufficient
ground for grant of bail.
7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant namely, Satish
Chandra Prajapati, involved in Crime No. 57/2024 registered at
Police Station- Farasgaon, District- Kondagaon (C.G.), for the
offence punishable under Sections 20(B) of the NDPS Act, is
rejected.
8. Learned trial Court concerned is directed to conclude the trial on day
to day basis under Section 346 of BNSS (corresponding Section 309
of Cr.P.C.), within a period of four months from the date of receipt of
a certified copy of this order, if there is no legal impediment.
9. The Director General of Police, Chhattisgarh, is directed to ensure
the presence of all the prosecution witnesses, including seizure
witness who are police personnel, for recording their evidence on the
next date fixed. Failing which, their salaries shall be stopped, as the
conclusion of the trial is being delayed due to the laxity of the police
personnel.
10. A copy of this order be sent to the Director General of Police,
Chhattisgarh through the learned State counsel for information and
necessary action forthwith.
11. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial
Court for necessary information and compliance forthwith.
- S Sd/-
(Ramesh Sinha)
Chief Justice
Kunal
