Chattisgarh High Court
(Rejected) Abid Ali vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 18 October, 2023
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
MCRC No. 7372 of 2023
1. Abid Ali S/o Rahmat Ali Aged About 32 Years R/o Nehru Nagar, Near
Marwadi Ghat, P.S. City Kotwali, District Raipur (C.G.)
2. Lala Vishwakarma S/o Mohan Vishwakarma Aged About 37 Years R/o
New Rajendra Nagr, Housing Board Colony, Raipur, P.S. Rajendra Nagar,
District Raipur (C.G.) At Present Address Baikunth Nagar, Nahar Para,
Amalidih, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
---- Applicants
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station
Basantpur, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.)
---- Non-applicant
(Cause-tile taken from the Case Information System)
For Applicants : Rekhraj Baghel, Advocate.
For Respondent-State : Mr.Vikram Sharma, Deputy Government Advocate
Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 18.10.2023
1. The applicants have preferred this First Bail Application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail, as they has been arrested in connection with Crime No.445/2023, registered at Police Station-Basantpur, Civil and Revenue District- Rajnandgaon, C.G. for the offence punishable under Section 20 (B) of N.D.P.S. Act.
2. The prosecution story in brief, is that, the police has received information by 2 the informant that on the date of incident, the unknown persons were transporting with illegal contraband Ganja By their Motorcycle for selling, and as per information the police has seized 8.100 kg contraband Ganja from the place of incident. Thereafter, the police has registered the case under Section 20(B) of N.D.P.S. Act against the present applicants.
3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that from the possession of the applicant intermediate quantity of the psychotropic substance ganja has been seized and therefore, it will not attract the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act as the commercial quantity for ganja as prescribed under the schedule is more than 20.00 Kgs. and from the possession of the applicants only 8.100kg of contraband Ganja has been seized. It has been further argued that though the applicant No. 1 has criminal antecedents but the applicant No. 2 has no criminal antecedent of NDPS Act or any other criminal case, the trial has not yet commenced and the applicants are in jail since 14.07.2023, hence he prays that the applicant be enlarged on bail.
4. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submits that the applicant No. 1 has seven criminal antecedents under the IPC and the Arms Act but the applicant No. 2 has no criminal antecedents under the NDPS Act or any other nature. It is submitted that total 8.100 kg of contraband Ganja has been recovered from the possession of the present applicants, therefore, their bail application is liable to be dismissed.
5. It transpires from the record that the applicants are in jail since 03.09.2023.
6. Considering the fact that the applicant No. 1 has 7 criminal antecedents under the IPC and Arms Act and is a habitual offender, further he has misused the bail granted to him earlier, and that the quantity of seized contraband Ganja is total 8.100kg of contraband Ganja and also in light of 3 the judgment rendered by the Supreme Court in Deepak Yadav V. State of Uttar Pradesh & Another (2022) 8 SCC 559, wherein the Supreme Court had cancelled the bail granted to the accused therein on the ground that the accused had previous antecedents, this Court is of the opinion that is not a fit case to enlarge the applicants on regular bail.. Accordingly, the bail application of applicant No. 1 - Abid Ali involved Crime No.445/2023, registered at Police Station-Basantpur, Civil and Revenue District- Rajnandgaon, C.G. for the offence punishable under Section 20 (B) of N.D.P.S. Act, is rejected.
7. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall make earnest endeavour to conclude the trial expeditiously within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, if there is no legal impediment.
8. So far as the applicant No. 2 is concerned, since he has no criminal antecedents under the Excise Act and the charge-sheet has not been filed till date as the investigation is going on, let the matter be listed for applicant No. 2 - Lala Vishwakarma after two months.
9. Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith.
Sd/-
(Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice amita