1 2025:CGHC:6547 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8192 of 2024 Lokesh Agrawal @ Sonu S/o Shri Rambhagat Agrawal Aged About 38 Years R/o Naya Talab, Ward No. 16, Gudhiyari, Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Police Station Tikrapara, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Rajeev Shrivastava Senior Advocate along with Mr. Kashif Shakeel, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Supriya Upasane, Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 05.02.2025 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 applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 735/2024 registered at Police Station Tikrapara District - Raipur (C.G.) for the offence under Sections 21, 29-B of Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and Section 25 of Arms Act, 1959. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief is that upon receiving information KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 from an informer, the police station Tikrapara, Raipur (C.G.) arrested a suspect named Shubham Soni and registered a case under section 21 (b) of NDPS Act in Crime No. 735/24 and during the investigation, the alleged pistol seized from Shubham Soni was stated to have been purchased from Lokesh Agarwal and on the basis of his memorandum statement, an additional crime Section 25 of the Arms Act was added in the case. In connection with the above, the police has arrested the applicant/accused Lokesh Agarwal considering him to be Ayush Agarwal in the case. It has been alleged in the FIR that the following narcotics drugs in alleged to be in Commercial quantity worth Rs. 5,20,000/- were found in possession of the co-accused Shubham Soni which is as follows:- S. Substance Seized [Small Commercial] Qty Weight Multiplier as per FIR Actual 1. MDMA (Pink) 0.5 gm/10 gm 54 0.46 mg 24 gm and 38 mg 0.02484 gm 2. MDMA (Blue) 0.5 gm/10 gm 45 0.46 mg 20 gm and 07 mg 0.0207 gm 3. CHARAS 100 gm/1.0 kg. 4 packets 7.96 gm 31 gm and 88 mg 31 gm and 88 mg 3. Learned Senior Advocate along with Mr. Kashif Shakeel, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case and he has not committed any offence as alleged. It is respectfully submitted that 3 the allegations leveled against him are false and fabricated. No seizure has been made by the police of any kind of narcotic substance or pistol from the present applicant. In the First Information Report filed by the police of Thana Tikrapara, Raipur (C.G.), there is no mention of the name of the present applicant and rather the name of a person named Ayush Agarwal, R/o Gulmohar Park, Gudhiyaari, Raipur (C.G.) is mentioned in the First Information Report, from whom the co-accused Shubham Soni has purchased the alleged pistol for his own safety. Thus, the above fact indicates that the applicant has been involved in the case with malicious intent. They further submits that from perusal of FIR, it is clear that in the memorandum statement the co-accused Shubham Soni has stated that he is involved in the work of selling illegal drugs since last 3-4 months and he gives money to his partner Abhishek Sahu, Amandeep Chhabra and Aryan Thackeray to provide tablets/charas and has purchased the pistol from Ayush Agarwal, R/o Gulmohar Park, Gudhiyari, Raipur for Rs. 1,00,000/-. Hence the act of the accused was found to be the commission of crime under section 21 (B) of NDPS Act for the seized pistol under section 25 of Arms Act has been added. Hence in view of above it is clear that the present applicant has been falsely roped in by the police. They further submits that the accused namely Ayush Agrawal has been involved in NDPS cases in the past and as per FIR his involvement is clearly seen but for the oblivious reason the Police has kept him out of the investigation and has arrested the present applicant in his place on the basis known to police. They further submits that the Court below 4 has wrongly rejected the bail application on the ground that the co- accused were found in possession of Drugs and Substances in commercial quantity, whereas from the perusal of the chart mentioned in para 5 it is clear that the seized substances are of small quantity. It is submitted that there is no allegation against the present applicant that he either aided or abetted or was found in possession of any Drugs or Narcotics substances nor any seizure. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the present applicant is made accused only by providing the co-accused a pistol and hence only Section 25 of the Arms Act has alleged against him. The present applicant is suffering from acute gastroenteritis, in respect of which the applicant/accused needs to consult a specialist doctor from time to time, hence considering the medical condition of the applicant/accused, it would be justified to release him on bail. The applicant is in jail since 23.09.2024 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time therefore, they prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 5. On the other hand, learned Panel Lawyer opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submit that an afÏdavit has been filed by the Superintendent of Police concerned in compliance of the Court’s order dated 17.01.2025, as per afÏdavit it is stated that “ due to typographical mistake, the name of the applicant was mentioned as Ayush Agrawal in the FIR in place of Lokesh Agrawal, which has been corrected on 23.09.2024 itself.” and it appears that the co-accused Shubham Soni from whom the contraband article was recovered, is much above the commercial quantity and further 5 the pistol was also recovered and in memorandum statement it is stated that the applicant had given a pistol to him. However, the fact that contraband articles were not seized from the possession of the present applicant, it has been recovered from the co-accused Shubham Soni, whose bail application has already been rejected by this Court being MCRC No. 7390/2024 vide order dated 17.01.2025 and the present applicant has made accused only that he has given a pistol to him for their safety. Accordingly, the present applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case that the present applicant has one criminal antecedent under the IPC of the year 2013 and in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court moreover, the fact that an afÏdavit has been filed by the Superintendent of Police concerned in compliance of the Court’s order dated 17.01.2025, as per afÏdavit it is stated that “due to typographical mistake, the name of the applicant was mentioned as Ayush Agrawal in the FIR in place of Lokesh Agrawal, which has been corrected on 23.09.2024 itself.” and it appears that the co-accused Shubham Soni from whom the contraband articles were recovered, is much above the commercial quantity and further the pistol was also recovered and in memorandum statement it is stated that the applicant had given a pistol to him. However, the fact that contraband articles were not seized from the possession of the applicant, it has been recovered 6 from the co-accused Shubham Soni, whose bail application has already been rejected by this Court being MCRC No. 7390/2024 vide order dated 17.01.2025 and the present applicant has made accused only that he has given a pistol to him for their safety and the case of the present applicant is distinguishable from that case of co-accused Shubham Soni from whom contraband articles were recovered and the applicant is in jail since 23.09.2024 and conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 8. Let the Applicant – Lokesh Agrawal @ Sonu, involved in Crime No. 735/2024 registered at Police Station Tikrapara District - Raipur (C.G.) for the offence under Sections 21, 29-B of Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and Section 25 of Arms Act, 1959, be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufÏcient 7 cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufÏcient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 9. 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 Kunal