Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 57954 (CHH)

IMRAN MALIK v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

MCRC/7076/2025 · 2025-10-30

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:53425 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7076 of 2025 • Imran Malik S/o Jamil Aged About 28 Years Native Of Jakir Colony, Faterhala Road, Police Station Lisari, District Meerut (U.P.), Currently Residing At Gangapur, Police Station Gandhinagar, District- Surguja (C.G.) ... Applicant versus • State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer, Police Station- Ambikapur, District- Surguja (C.G.) ... Respondent (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Applicant : Mr. Harsh Verma, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Amit Verma, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 31/10/2025 1. At the very outset, learned counsel for the applicant seeks permission of this Court to withdraw this application, as the seizure witnesses of this case are being recorded. 2. Prayer made by learned counsel for the applicant is accordingly rejected. 3. This is first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Date: 2025.11.01 13:28:43 +0530 2 regular bail to the applicant, who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.551/2025 registered at Police Station- Ambikapur District - Sarguja (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 21(C) read with Section 29 of NDPS Act. 4. The prosecution story in brief, is that the present applicant along with other co-accused persons were arrested on 08.08.2025 for an alleged offence under Section 21(C) read with Section 29 of the NDPS Act for alleged possession of commercial quantities of Psychotropic substances. Hence, this application. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in crime in question. It is further argued by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant has purchased scarp metal brass weighing 18 kg on 06.08.2025 by paying of Rs 72,00/-, but the co-accused had sold the said articles and purchased narcotics for the said amount. He further submits that the present applicant has one criminal antecedent bearing Crime No.531 of 2025 for the offence under Section 305, 331(4), 317, which is pending before lower Court. He further submits that charge-sheet has already been filed in the present case and applicant is in jail since 08.08.2025, trial will take quite some time to come to its conclusion, therefore, he prays before this Court to grant regular bail to the applicant. 6. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail and pointed out that no recovery has been made of psychotropic substances from the physical possession of the present applicant, whereas the same has been recovered from the possession of co-accused persons i.e., NRX BUPRENORPHINE INJECTION I.P T- GESIC 2 M.L Batch No. 1-261, 100 pieces, total 200 M.L and 3 PHENIRAMINE MALETATE INJECTION IP AVIL 10 M.L, total 100 pieces, total 1,000 M.L and trial is in progress, hence, the present applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 8. Taking into consideration the fact and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and, the offence in question, which appears to be an organized crime for illegal trading/smuggling of the psychotropic substances, which is evident from the submissions made by the learned State counsel, thus this Court is of the view that it is not a fit case to release the applicant on bail. 9. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant namely Imran Malik, involved in Crime No. 551/2025 registered at Police Station- Ambikapur District - Sarguja (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 21(C) read with Section 29 of NDPS Act, is rejected at this stage. 10. Trial Court is directed not to entertain any bail application of the present applicant, only proceed the trial of the present case. 11. However, the Registrar (Judicial) is directed to send a copy of this order to the concerned trial Court for necessary information and direction. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaishali