Allowed

Rajendra Yadav v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC19 Jun 2023MCRC/1240/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment allowed a bail application filed by an accused accused of illegal possession of Rexogesic injections under the NDPS Act. The court granted bail due to the hostility of the seizure witness and the applicant's long detention, setting a personal bond and two sureties.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; released on bail on personal bond of Rs. 50,000 and two sureties for Rs. 50,000 each.

Rajendra Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Narcotics (NDPS) | Chhattisgarh HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

MCRC No. 1240 of 2023

¶5

Rajendra Yadav S/o Kailash Yadav Aged About 21 Years R/o Chainpur, Jharkatia, Yadavpara, P.S. Babhani, District Sonbhandra (U.P.) --- Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Chhattisgarh Through S.H.O. Police Station Out Post Manipur, P.S. Ambikapur, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh.

¶8

--- Respondent

¶9

CAUSE TITLE TAKEN FROM CIS PERIPHERY

¶10

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------For Applicant : Mr. Sanjay Pathak, Adv. For Respondent/State : Mr. Gurudev I. Sharan, 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 12.06.2022 in connection with Crime No.498/2022 registered at Police Station Out Post Manipur, PS Amibkapur, District Surguja for the offence punishable under Section 21 (B) & 29 of the NDPS Act.

¶14

2 As per prosecution story, the accused/applicant was found in the illicit possession of 65 numbers of Rexogesic injection containing 2 ML Each i.e. total 130 ML.

¶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 seized material was found from the illicit possession of the applicant. He also submits that seizure witness Satyanarayan

¶16

¶17

Singh has been examined before the trial Court and he has not supported the case of the prosecution. He also submits that the applicant is languishing in jail since 12.06.2022 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, State counsel 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 witness has 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

¶24

¶25

the concerned trial Court.

¶26

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

Rajendra Yadav v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajendra Yadav 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

Banmali Baghel Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Yashwant Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh