Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 47501 (CHH)

ANIL GUPTA v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

MCRC/8840/2025 · 2025-11-06

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:54355 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8840 of 2025 Anil Gupta S/o Late Mangal Sao Gupta Aged About 33 Years Resident Of Mayapur, Nearby Chandani Chowk, Ambikapur, Police Station Ambikapur, District- Sarguja (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House O2cer, Police Of Police Station Ambikapur, District- Sarguja (C.G.) ... Non-applicant(s) (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Anil Gulati, Advocate. For Non-applicant(s) : Mr. Swajeet Ubeja, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 07.11.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.112/2025, registered at Police Station: Ambikapur District- Surguja (C.G.) for the o:ences punishable under Sections 21(C) and 22(C) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, “NDPS Act”). 2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that on 20.02.2025, the police KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 received a secret information that the applicant along with other co- accused persons were in possession of prohibited syrup and ampoules and were waiting for customers. Acting upon the information, the police intercepted the applicant along with two other persons, who disclosed their identities. After completing the required formalities, the police seized WING RS Codeine Phosphate & Triprolidine Hydrochloride Syrup (Onerex TM) 100 ml, 149 bottles of NRX Buprenorphine Maleate Injection I.P. 0.3 mg/ml (Rexozecik R), and 100 ampoules of Pheniramine Maleate Injection I.P. (Avil 10 ml) from their joint possession. Thereafter, the present applicant and the other two accused persons, namely Chandan Soni and Ajeet Singh, were arrested for the commission of the alleged o:ences. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that the applicant not acted in a manner as it is alleged by the prosecution. The false seizure memo has been prepared by the police in order to rope the applicant in a false criminal case and applicant is hopeful regarding this fact that he would be acquitted from the allegation of this case. The applicant is in jail since 20-02-2025 and charge sheet has already been @led and further he has no previous criminal antecedent and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion therefore, he prays for grant of bail. 4. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for grant of bail and submits that the quantity of contraband article which is said to have been recovered from the joint possession of the applicant along with co-accused, is above commercial quantity and hence, it is an organized crime, looking to the seriousness of this 3 case, the present applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of o:ence levelled against the applicant and further the fact that the quantity of contraband article which is said to have been recovered from the joint possession of the applicant along with co-accused is above the commercial quantity and and the applicant has failed to give an explanation regarding the same hence, it is an organized crime, looking to the seriousness of this case, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a @t case to release the applicant on bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of applicant – Anil Gupta, involved in Crime No.112/2025, registered at Police Station: Ambikapur District- Surguja (C.G.) for the o:ences punishable under Sections 21(C) and 22(C) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, “NDPS Act”), is rejected. 8. Needless to sat that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 9. O2ce is directed to provide a certi@ed copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal