Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 61355 (CHH)

RAJ TANDI v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

MCRC/10285/2025 · 2025-12-11

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:60601 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 10285 of 2025 Raj Tandi S/o Lavindra Tandi Aged About 19 Years R/o Village - Tulagaon, Narlaload, Police Station - Narla, Tahsil - Narla, District - Kalahandi (Odisha) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House OfÏcer, Police Station - Khamtarai, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh. ... Non-applicant For Applicants : Ms. Jyoti Kaushik, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 12.12.2025 1. The applicants have preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) in connection with Crime No.450/2025, registered at Police Station – Khamtarai, District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Section 20(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, for short, the NDPS Act. RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 2. The prosecution story in brief, is that the Police of Police Station – Khamtarai, District – Raipur (C.G.) has received a secret information through the informant and on the basis of the said information, the Police authority has seized a total of 40.260 Kgs of Ganja from the joint possession of the applicant and other co- accused persons. Thereafter, the applicant was were arrested and the case was registered by the Police. 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 the charge-sheet has been filed in this case. The applicant has no previous criminal antecedents and he is in jail since 17.05.2025. The conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, therefore, she prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. Learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that a total of 40.260 Kgs of Ganja has been seized from the joint possession of the applicant and other co-accused persons, which is much above the commercial quantity. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed in this case. She also submits that bail application of the other co-accused persons, namely, Vasudev Mahanand and Dev Mahanand have been rejected by this Court in MCRC No. 10227/2025 vide order dated 11.11.2025 and as such, the applicant is also not entitled to be released on bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 3 6. Taking into consideration the fact that the quantity of contraband article seized from the joint possession of the applicants i.e. 40.260 Kgs of Ganja, is much above the commercial quantity, and no such plausible explanation has been given for the recovery, as it could not be a case of false implication, the charge-sheet has been filed in this case, further the bail application of the other co-accused persons, namely, Vasudev Mahanand and Dev Mahanand have been rejected by this Court in MCRC No. 10227/2025 vide order dated 11.11.2025 hence, the bail application of applicant – Raj Tandi involved in Crime No.450/2025, registered at Police Station – Khamtarai, District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Section 20(C) of the NDPS Act, is rejected at this stage. 7. Needless to say that the learned trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed with the trial and conclude the same, expeditiously. 8. The OfÏce 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 Rahul Dewangan