Chattisgarh High Court
Altaf Khan vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 24 March, 2022
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
MCRC No. 65 of 2022
• Altaf Khan S/o Shri Umar Khan Aged About 36 Years Caste -
Musalman, R/o Village - Doomardih, P.S. - Dhourpur, District -
Surguja (Chhattisgarh)
---- Applicant
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police
Outpost - Pandrapath, Police Station - Bagicha, District Jashpur
(Chhattisgarh)
---- Respondent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For Applicant : Shri Sumit Shrivastava, Advocate For Respondent/State : Shri Vinod Tekam, Panel Lawyer
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hon'ble Shri Justice N.K. Chandravanshi Order On Board 24.3.2022.
1. This is first bail application filed under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail to the applicant, who has been arrested on 17.11.2021 in connection with Crime No.122/2021 registered at Outpost Pandrapath Police Station Bagicha Distt. Jashpur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (for short 'the NDPS Act').
2. Prosecution story, in brief, is that on 09.9.2020 at about 8.00 pm, one person had come to village Bhadiya in a motor cycle carrying 95 bottles of Corex Rc-kuff Plus(Codeine Phosphate & Triprolidine Hydro chloride) of 100 ml; 5 ml of each bottle contains 10 mg Codeine Phosphate. On being enquired by the villagers, the applicant fled away from the spot leaving behind his motor cycle CT 100 bearing registration No. CG 15 DA 7150 and a bag containing aforementioned cough syrup bottles. Based on the above facts, present crime under Section 21 of the NDPS Act was registered against unknown person and motor cycle and the alleged contraband substances were seized from the spot. During investigation it was revealed that it is the applicant who had gone to the said village in the aforesaid motor cycle with the alleged contraband substance. Thereafter he was arrested on 2 17.11.2021 and after completion of investigation, charge sheet has been filed.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. FIR has been lodged against unknown person and even the alleged contraband substances were not seized from the applicant. It is further submitted that the applicant is in custody since 17.11.2021 and charge sheet has been filed on 04.12.2021, hence, he may be released on bail.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application stating that since the applicant had fled away from the spot, the alleged contraband substance could not have been seized from him, otherwise, he is the person who had gone to the said village for selling the contraband substance and more over, the applicant is the registered owner of the motor cycle seized from the spot. It is further submitted that it is a case of seizure of commercial quantity of contraband substance, hence, he is not entitled to be released on bail.
5. Considered the submission of learned counsel for the parties, perused the case diary and the material available on record.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, particularly considering the fact that the alleged contraband substances were not seized from the physical possession of the applicant, charge sheet has been filed, he is in custody since long, I feel inclined to grant bail to the applicant. Therefore, the application filed under Section 439 of the CrPC is allowed. It is directed that in the event of the applicant executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety of the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court for his appearance before the concerned Court as and when directed by the said court, he be released on bail.
Certified copy as per rules.
Sd/-
(N.K. Chandravanshi) JUDGE Bini