Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 42704 (CHH)

SUNIL NISHAD v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

MCRC/7760/2024 · 2025-01-03

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:372 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7760 of 2024 1 - Sunil Nishad S/o Jaishri Nishad Aged About 30 Years R/o Dangal Naugaon P.S. Bisunpura District - Kusinagar (Uttar Pradesh) 2 - Dipak Kumar Bharti S/o Rajendra Ram Bharti Aged About 22 Years R/o Bhagwanpura P.S. Bhitaha District - West Champaran (Bihar) ... Applicants versus State of Chhattisgarh Through The SHO Police Station Ganj District - Raipur Chhattisgarh. ... Non-Applicant For Applicants : Mr. Shishir Dixit, Advocate. For Non-Applicant : Mr. Hariom Rai, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 03.01.2025 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 applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 244/2024 registered at Police Station – Ganj, District - Raipur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 20(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the Police of Police Station – Ganj, District - Raipur (C.G.), had received secret information ASHISH TIWARI Digitally signed by ASHISH TIWARI Date: 2025.01.07 14:25:12 +0530 2 from the informant and on the basis of the said information conducted a raid and seized total 25.360 Kgs of contraband article Cannabis from the joint possession of the present applicants. Thereafter, the Police has registered the offence punishable under Section 20(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 against the present applicants. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the present applicants have been falsely implicated in this case and the alleged contraband article was not recovered from the joint possession of the present applicants and no any contraband article has been seized from the applicants, the contraband article was seized from two bags which does not belong to applicants. He also submits that the applicants are the young members of their family and have no criminal antecedents. He further submits that the present applicants are in jail since 17.06.2024 and conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the present applicants. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicants and submits that the quantity of contraband article i.e. 25.360 Kgs Cannabis, was recovered from the possession of the present applicants, which is much above the commercial quantity and as such, the applicants are not entitled to be released on bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 3 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and further the fact that the contraband article i.e. 25.360 Kgs Cannabis which has been seized from the possession of the present applicants, is much above the commercial quantity and the applicants have failed to give any explanation for the same, further it cannot be a case of false implication, accordingly, the bail application of the applicants – Sunil Nishad and Dipak Kumar Bharti, involved in Crime No. 244/2024 registered at Police Station – Ganj, District - Raipur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 20(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, is rejected. 7. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trail expeditiously. 8. OfÏce is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Ashish /Rahul Dewangan