Allowed

Mukund Singh and Anr. v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC5 Nov 2019MCRC/3173/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Chhattisgarh allowed a bail application filed by two accused persons charged with offences under Section 20-B of the NDPS Act. The court held that it was a fit case for granting bail considering the detention period and lack of antecedents, directing them to execute a personal bond.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on executing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- each with one surety in the like sum.

Mukund Singh and Anr. Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Narcotics (NDPS) | Chhattisgarh HC (2019)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

MCRC No. 3173 of 2019

¶5

Mukund Singh S/o Ramnarayan Singh Aged About 40 Years Caste Bhumiyar, R/o 51/207, J Block, Street No. 06, West Sagarpur 46, Police Station Sagarpur, District Najafgarh, Delhi.

¶6

Nilesh Kumar S/o Surajbhan Aged About 24 Years R/o Rampachar, Police Station Usarahar, District Itawa, Uttar Pradesh.

¶7

---Applicants

¶8

Versus

¶9

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer, Police Station Nagarnar, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh.

¶10

---- Respondent

¶11

For Applicant For Respondent

¶12

: Ms. Smita Jha, Advocate. : Mr. Wasim Miyan, P.L.

¶13

Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey Order on Board

¶14

05/11/2019

¶15

The accused/applicants have moved this first bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for releasing them on regular bail during trial in connection with Crime No. 211/2018 registered at Police Station – Nagarnar District Bastar (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 20-B of Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substance Act.

¶16

The prosecution story, in brief, is that on 28.10.2018, on the basis of information received from an informant, Police Personnel searched and seized 33 kg. contraband article cannabis (Ganja) from the possession of applicants in a white color Car bearing registration No. DL ZC 1059. Thereafter, the applicants have been

¶17

¶18

arrested.

¶19

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that they are in jail since 06.11.2018, there is no previous antecedent against them and trial is likely to take some time, therefore, the present appellants may be released on bail.

¶20

On the other hand, counsel for the State opposes the bail application.

¶21

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.

¶22

Taking into consideration the nature and gravity of the offence, facts and circumstances of the case, and further considering the detention period of the applicants, this Court is of the view that it is a fit case to release the applicants on bail. Accordingly, the application is allowed.

¶23

Accused/applicants are directed to be released on bail on their executing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- each, with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court. They are directed to appear before the said Court on each and every date given to them by the said Court.

¶24

Sd/(Rajani Dubey) Judge

¶25

Vijay Sahu

Mukund Singh and Anr. v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mukund Singh and Anr. v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rudra Pratap Singh Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Another

Pranita Deshmukh Vs Om Prakash Verma

Ramesh Kumar Sharma Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Judhisthir Nayak Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ray Singh Sodhi Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Mahesh Kumar Gautam & Anr. Vs State of Chhattisgarh