1 2025:CGHC:8191 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7164 of 2024 • Sumit Soni S/o Ashok Soni Aged About 25 Years R/o Ward No. - 7, Teachers Colony, Rajhara P.S. - Rajhara, District : Balod, Chhattisgarh --- Applicant. Versus • State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. - Rajhara, District : Balod, Chhattisgarh --- Respondent. MCRC No. 7710 of 2024 • Manish Kumar Nirmalkar S/o Late Lakhan Nirmalkar Aged About 35 Years Resident Of Ward No. 7 Teacher Colony, Rajhara, Police Station- Rajhara, District- Balod (C.G.), District : Balod, Chhattisgarh ---Applicant. Versus • State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer, Police Station- Rajhara, District Balod, Chhattisgarh, District : Balod, Chhattisgarh --- Respondent 2 For applicant in MCRC No 7164 of 2024 : Mr. Hemant Gupta, Advocate. For applicant in MCRC No 7710 of 2024 : Mr. Sudhanshu Kumar Singh, Advocate. For State Mr. Kishanlal Sahu, Dy. Govt. Advocate. (Hon’ble Mr. Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas) Order on Board 17/02/2025 1. Since both the bail petitions arise out of same Crime No. 60 of 2024, they are heard analogously and are being disposed of by this common order. 2. At the outset, learned counsel appearing for the applicant in MCRC No. 7710 of 2024 (Manish Kumar Nirmalkar ) would submit that he seeks permission of this Court to withdraw this bail petition, at this stage. 3. Permission is granted 4. Accordingly, MCRC No. 7710 of 2024 is dismissed as withdrawn. 5. So far as MCRC No 7164 of 2024 is concerned, the applicant has preferred this second bail application under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail as he has been arrested on 27-2-2024 in connection with Crime No 60 of 2024 registered at Police Station – Rajhara for the offence punishable under Sections 22 and 27 of the NDPS Act. First bail application of the applicant was withdrawn with liberty to revive the same after some material witnesses are examined, vide order dated 24-7-2024. 6. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 27-2-2024 on secret information received by the Police that two persons namely Sumit Soni resident of Rajhara Ward No. 07 Teacher Colony s/o. Ashok Soni, age 25 3 years Manish Kumar Nirmalkar, father, late Lakhan Lal Nirmalkar age 35 years Sakin Ward or 07 Teacher Colony Rajhara Mashruka were carrying and on that basis the Police searched the applicants and on search, Narcotic capsule filled in four boxes from Sumeet Soni ALPRAZOLAM TABLETS I.P. 0.50 MG in which weight of one tablet is 0.12 gm Full tablet 24, total weight 288 grams and filled in 10 box SPAS-TRANCAN PLUS capsules Total 10 packets in each strip 24 nos capsules Total 1440 capsules Weight of one capsule 0.6gm full weight 884 gm and 12. From Manish Kumar Nirmalkar SPAS-TRANCAN PLUS capsules filled in 07 boxes in each strip 24 Nos Capsules Total 1008 capsules Weight of one capsule 0.6gm Total weight of capsules 604.8 gm Total weight 1756.8gm total value of Rs.Rs.23,352/- were found from the applicant and other co-accused. 7. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant has been falsely implicated and he has not committed any offence. He would further submit that the Police have seized the drug in open place and in concise possession of the applicant and there is no direct evidence available to prosecution to indulge the applicant in the crime. He would further submit that out of 15 witnesses only five witnesses have been examined, the applicant is in jail since 27-2-2024 and suffers from mental disorderness and trial is likely to take sometime, therefore, the applicant may be granted bail. 8. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposing the bail application of the applicant would submit that the applicant along with other co-accused were involved in commission of transaction of contraband drugs and they were carrying the aforesaid drugs which are harmful to the society and no sufficient material has been placed on record to prove that he has authority to transport the same. He would further submit that the applicant is not suffering from mental disorderness and looking to the gravity of the ofence he would pray for rejection of the bail petition. 4 9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 10. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the gravity of the offence, I am of the view that it is not a fit case where the applicant should be enlarged on bail. Accordingly, the instant MCRC No.7164 of 2024 is rejected. However, the applicant is at liberty to take all his defence permissible under the law including the ground that the applicant is suffering from mental disorderness before the learned trial Court. Certified copy as per rules. Sd/- (Narendra Kumar Vyas) JUDGE Raju RAVVA SATYANARAYANA RAJU Digitally signed by RAVVA SATYANARAYANA RAJU Date: 2025.02.18 17:35:57 +0530