Allowed

Suraj Kashyap v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC17 Aug 2022MCRC/6653/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Chhattisgarh allowed a second bail application for an applicant accused under Section 22(C) of the NDPS Act, citing hostile seizure witnesses and lengthy trial duration as grounds, despite opposition from the State counsel.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail with two sureties on execution of a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- subject to standard conditions regarding tampering, trial attendance, and submission of Aadhaar copies.

Suraj Kashyap Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Narcotics (NDPS) | Chhattisgarh HC (2022)

¶1

NAFR

¶2

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶3

M.Cr.C No.6653 of 2022

¶4

Suraj Kashyap S/o Raju Kashyap, Aged About 23 Years R/o Gangapur Kanya Parisar Road, Gandhi Nagar, District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh

¶5

---- Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Gandhi Nagar, District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh ---- Non-Applicant

¶8

For Applicant: Shri Sushil Dubey, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Shri Gagan Tiwari, G.A.

¶9

Hon'ble Shri Justice Deepak Kumar Tiwari Order on Board

¶10

17.08.2022

¶11

This is the 2^nd bail application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail to the Applicant, who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.704/2021 registered at Police Station – Gandhi Nagar, District –Surguja, Chhattisgarh for the offence punishable under Section 22(C) of the NDPS Act. Earlier application has been dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 06.05.2022 passed in M.Cr.C No.3190/2022.

¶12

Allegation against the present Applicant is that he was found in illegal possession of 50 Rexogesic Buprenorphin injections IP.

¶13

Learned counsel for the Applicant submits that the Applicant has been falsely implicated in the crime in question and submits further that he is in jail since 18.12.2021. He further submits that both the seizure witnesses have not supported the case of the prosecution and turned hostile, conclusion of trial is likely to take quite some time, therefore, the present Applicant may be released on bail.

¶14

On the other hand, learned counsel for the Non-Applicant/State opposes the bail application and submits that there are no previous criminal antecedents

¶15

against the present Applicant.

¶16

Having heard learned counsel for the parties, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, considering that both the seizure witnesses have not supported the case of the prosecution and turned hostile, further considering the pre-trial detention period, there is no likelihood of the Applicant tampering with the prosecution evidence or absconding and conclusion of trial may take some time, the application is allowed.

¶17

It is directed that in the event of the Applicant's executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:-

¶18

(a) he shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such fact to the Court.

¶19

(b) he shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial, and (c) he shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial.

¶20

(d) the Applicant and the surety shall submit a copy of their adhaar card along with a coloured postcard full size photo having printed the adhaar number on it, which shall be verified by the trial Court.

¶21

(e) he shall not repeat the similar offence in future failing which, this order granting bail shall automatically stand cancelled without any reference to the Bench.

¶22

Sd/-

¶23

(Deepak Kumar Tiwari) Judge.

¶24

Priya

Suraj Kashyap v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suraj Kashyap 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

Om Surgical Industries Vs State of Chhattisgarh

M/S C. D. O. Securities and Public Helpline Service Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Metas Security and Fire Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Safik Khan Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Union of India Vs Tarun Kumar Sahu

Pradeep Shukla Vs State of Chhattisgarh