Allowed

Banmali Baghel v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC19 Jun 2023MCRC/1073/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Chhattisgarh granted bail to an applicant accused of possessing ganja under the NDPS Act, citing hostile seizure witnesses, lack of prior criminal record, and prolonged pretrial detention.

What did the court decide?

Release of the applicant on bail subject to personal bond with two sureties of Rs. 50,000/- each and adherence to conditions regarding attendance and property alienation.

Banmali Baghel Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Narcotics (NDPS) | Chhattisgarh HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

MCRC No. 1073 of 2023

¶5

Banmali Baghel S/o Salimdhar Baghel, Aged About 40 Years Caste Kumhar, R/o Jaibel, P.S. Karpawand, District Bastar Chhattigarh.

¶6

---- Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Darbha, District Bastar Chhattigarh. --- Respondent

¶9

CAUSE TITLE TAKEN FROM CIS PERIPHERY

¶10

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------For Applicant : Mr. Satish Gupta, Adv. For Respondent/State : Mr. B. P. Banjare, Dy. GA .

¶11

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Justice Deepak Kumar Tiwari Order On Board

¶12

19.06.2023

¶13

This application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the accused/applicant who is languishing in jail since 04.08.2022 in connection with Crime No.62/2022 registered at Police Station Darbha, Bastar for the offence punishable under Section 20 (B) ii (C) of the NDPS Act.

¶14

2 As per prosecution story, on the basis of secret information, the police has seized total 20.100 Kilogram Ganja from the illicit possession of the applicant.

¶15

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the accused/applicant is innocent and has been roped in a false case. He further submits that there is no cogent evidence that the said contraband was seized from the illicit possession of the applicant. He also submits that seizure witnesses have been examined before the trial Court and they have not supported the

¶16

¶17

case of the prosecution. He also submits that the applicant is languishing in jail since 04.08.2022 and final conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time therefore, the applicant may be released on bail. He also submits that the applicant would abide all terms and conditions imposed on him while granting bail.

¶18

4. Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the bail application. On query being made, she submits that as per case diary, applicant has no previous criminal record.

¶19

5. Having considered the submission of counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, further considering the period of pretrial detention of the applicant; applicant has no criminal past and that seizure witnesses have been turned hostile, I deem it appropriate to release the applicant on bail.

¶20

6. Accordingly, the application is allowed and it is directed that on applicant’s furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:-

¶21

(a) he shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial,

¶22

(b) he shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of case,

¶23

(c) the applicant and the sureties shall submit a copy of their Aadhar Card along with a coloured postcard full size photo having printed the Aadhar number on it, which shall be verified by the concerned trial Court.

¶24

(d) he shall file an affidavit showing details of immovable

¶25

¶26

property and bank account held by him and his dependent family members.

¶27

(e) he shall not alienate any immovable property without prior written permission of the trial Court.

¶28

7 . It is also made clear that if the applicant is found involved in similar nature of offence in future, then the prosecution/State would be at liberty to take appropriate steps for cancellation of his bail.

¶29

Sd/-

¶30

(Deepak Kumar Tiwari) Judge

¶31

Ajay.

Banmali Baghel v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Banmali Baghel 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

Sadhram Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Arun Maravi Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ram Singh Alias Sonu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Vijay Bharti ( Wrongly Mentioned as 235 Years ) Vs the State of Chhattisgarh

Rajendra Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Yashwant Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh