Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 53006 (CHH)

ARMAN KHAN URF RAJA PATHAN v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

MCRC/8048/2025 · 2025-10-09

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:50622 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8048 of 2025 Arman Khan Urf Raja Pathan S/o Rahman Khan Aged About 35 Years R/o - Ward No. 11, Jawaharpara, Balod, District - Balod, C.G. ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - P.S.- Balod, District – Balod, C.G. ---- Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Hemant Gupta, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 10.10.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this Second Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Crime No.515/2024, registered at Police Station- Balod, District – Balod (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Section 20(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, for short, the NDPS Act. 2. The prosecution story in brief, is that the Police of Police Station – Balod, District – Balod (C.G.) has received a secret information through the informant and on the basis of such information, the Police has seized a total of 1.507 Kgs of Ganja from the possession of the present applicant. Thereafter, the applicant was arrested and crime was registered. RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that First bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court vide order dated 09.01.2025 passed in MCRC No. 139/2025, on the ground that the applicant has 2 criminal antecedents under the NDPS Act, but out of which in one case the applicant has been convicted and against the said conviction order, the applicant filed an appeal which was partly allowed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 21.07.2025 passed in CRA No.1069/2025. The applicant is in jail since 18.10.2024. The conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, therefore, she prays for grant of bail. 4. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submits that a total of 1.507 Kgs of Ganja has been seized from the possession of the applicant. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed in this case. It is further submitted that there are 2 criminal antecedents of the applicant under the NDPS Act, and though he has been convicted in one case and against the said conviction order, the applicant filed an appeal which was partly allowed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 21.07.2025 passed in CRA No.1069/2025, but one criminal antecedent under the NDPS Act is still pending. Hence, this second bail application is liable to be dismissed. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. Taking into consideration the fact that the quantity of contraband article Ganja seized from the possession of the applicant i.e. 1.507 Kgs of Ganja and the charge-sheet has been filed in this case, further that there 3 are 2 criminal antecedents of the applicant under the NDPS Act, and though he has been convicted in one case and against the said conviction order, the applicant filed an appeal which was partly allowed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 21.07.2025 passed in CRA No.1069/2025, but one criminal antecedent under the NDPS Act is still pending, thus, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. 7. Accordingly, the Second bail application of applicant – Arman Khan Urf Raja Pathan involved in Crime No.515/2024, registered at Police Station- Balod, District – Balod (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Section 20(B) of the NDPS Act, is rejected at this stage. 8. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 9. The Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rajshekhar