1 2025:CGHC:33959-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 469 of 2022 Ajju @ Ajay Chakravarti S/o Late Bansilal Chakravarti Aged About 32 Years R/o Bannak Chowk, Sirgitti, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant(s) versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Of Police Station Torwa, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ...Non-applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Shailendra Dubey and Ms. Shivali Dubey, Advocates. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Swajeet Ubeja, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru , Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 18.07.2025 1. Heard Mr. Shailendra Dubey and Ms. Shivali Dubey, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Mr. Swajeet Ubeja, learned Panel Lawyer, appearing for the non-applicant/State. 2. The present petition has been filed by the applicant with the following prayer: BRIJMOHAN MORLE Digitally signed by BRIJMOHAN MORLE Date: 2025.07.18 18:50:26 +0530 2 “It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that the Hon’ble Court may be kind enough to allow the application filed by the petitioner and kindly quash the FIR along with the entire challan (charge-sheet) against the present applicant. Any other order that may be deemed fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case may also kindly be passed.” 3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on the basis of the secret information received by the Police Station Torwa on 27.11.2021, the applicant/accused Ajay Chakraborty along with other co-accused Dinesh Damahe and Suraj Singh had a white coloured car number CG 10AR /25476 was caught illegally transporting 22 kg 300 grams of ganja red mine between the car seat in the direction of Kanoi Paper Mill. The applicant/accused and other accused were found to be transporting ganja illegally in their joint possession, after registering an offence against the accused under Section 20(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, ‘NDPS Act), on 27.11.2021, the said accused were arrested and investigated. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case, the actual fact of the case is that the present applicant was in his house the officials of the Cyber Cell took the present applicant along with them for investigation on dated 25.11.2021, at around 2.00 p.m. He further submits that after of 2-3 hours when the present applicant did not return home and the Cyber Cell official did not release him, thereafter, the wife of the present applicant when to the Tarbahar Police Station to enquire about the present applicant, the officials were investigating the present applicant 3 by torturing him by abusing and filthy language and were threatening him to confess the crime done by some other person. 5. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the wife of the present applicant made a phone call to their known Advocate, and after the knowing about the act done by the officials of the Cyber Cell when the above-mentioned Advocate reached to the department of Cyber Cell, he himself enquired about the present applicant when by he was given information that the present applicant will be released in an hour or so, and in front of the said Advocate the officials where torturing by beating and abusing him by using slangs and filthy language to confess the crime which is not done by some other person. He further contended that when the applicant was not released on the next day the said Advocate filed an application under Section 57 before the Chief Judicial Magistrate and after the filing of the said application the Police arrested the present applicant showing the arrest of 27.11.2021, at around 03.05 p.m. and was present before the Chief Judicial Magistrate on 28.11.2021, at around 4-4.30 p.m. and an application under Section 167 was also filled before the Chief Judicial Magistrate which was duly rejected. 6. It is further stated by the learned counsel for the applicant that an application informing the present applicant to falsely been implicated in NDPS case was also sent to the Human Rights Commission, Raipur (C.G.), Police Headquarters Raipur (C.G.), the Chief Justice High Court of Chhattisgarh, State Women Commission (C.G.) through registered mode. He also stated that an application for presenting the CCTV footage was 4 also filed and the concerned Court issued a notice to the P.S. Tarbahar to submit the CCTV footage from dated 25.11.2021 to 27.11.2021, but the information was given by the concerned Police Station that the cameras were not working. He would submit that the application under Section 167(2) was filed before the learned trial Court to release the present applicant on mandatory bail as he was not produced before the concerned Magistrate within 24 hours which is prescribe in the procedure code. The CCTV footage and to resend the sample of the seized cannabis for FSL test. He further submits that the applicant had already been granted regular bail by this Court. 7. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that from perusal of the entire documents annexed in the present case, the applicant without any basis has been falsely roped, as there is no ingredient in the prosecution story to show that a false story has been concocted against the appellant with an ulterior motive. He further submits that he has filed statement of three prosecution witnesses through covering memo and all three prosecution witnesses have not supported the prosecution case and turned hostile. Hence, this petition. 8. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the submission made by the learned counsel for the applicant and submits that the trial is in progress, therefore, the present petition is liable to be dismissed. 9. We have perused the prayers and pleadings made in the petition along with the annexures annexed in this petition. 10. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case that 5 the charges have already been framed against the applicant and three prosecution witnesses have already been examined by the learned trial Court and the trial is in progress, therefore, at this stage, we are not inclined to interfere in the matter. Further, there is no interim order passed in favour of the petitioner. 11. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed leaving it open to the applicant to take all plea for his defence at an appropriate stage, which he has taken in this petition. However, this Court hope and trusts that the learned trial Court shall make an earnest endeavour to conclude the trial expeditiously, in accordance with law, if there is no legal impediment. Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Brijmohan