Allowed

Karan Singh v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC6 Jul 2023MCRC/2920/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Chhattisgarh allowed second bail applications in three connected cases involving 20+ kgs of ganja recovery. The Court granted bail relying on a Supreme Court judgment where seizure witnesses failed to support the prosecution, directing release on personal bond.

What did the court decide?

Decided by common order, applications allowed. Applicants to be released on bail on furnishing personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- along with one local surety for like amount.

Karan Singh Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Narcotics (NDPS) | Chhattisgarh HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

MCRC No. 2352 of 2023

¶5

Atul Singh S/o Surendra Singh Aged About 33 Years R/o - Village - Chaowari, Police Station - Kaint, District : Bareilly, Uttar Pradesh

¶6

---- Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer Police StationKunkuri, District : Jashpur, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent

¶9

¶10

MCRC No. 2835 of 2023

¶11

• Pappu Singh S/o Mahendra Singh Aged About 37 Years R/o Village Chaowari, Police Station Kaint, District Bareli (U.P.) ---- Applicant

¶12

Versus

¶13

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Kunkuri, District : Jashpur, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent

¶14

¶15

MCRC No. 2920 of 2023

¶16

1. Karan Singh S/o Kanchan Singh Aged About 32 Years R/o Village - Chaowari, Police Station - Kaint, District - Bareli (U.P.)

¶17

1. Kishan Kumar S/o Dhakan Lal Aged About 42 Years R/o Village - Jagatpur, Police Station - Bardari, Near Hospital Gali, District - Bareli (U.P.) (The Cause Title Is Wrongly Mentioned In The Bail Rejection Order Of The Court Below, Whereas In The Order Sheet The Name Of Present Applicants Are Mentioned) ---- Applicants

¶18

Versus

¶19

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station - Kunkuri, District - Jashpur (C.G.)

¶20

---- Respondent

¶21

¶22

For Applicants : Shri J.K.Saxena and Shri Sanjeev Kumar Sahu, Advocates

¶23

For State : Shri Ravi Maheshwari, Panel Lawyer

¶24

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput Order On Board

¶25

06/07/2023

¶26

Since the above three bail applications are arising out of the same crime number, the same are being decided by this common order.

¶27

These are second bail applications. First bail applications were dismissed as withdrawn.

¶28

The applicants have been arrested in connection with Crime No.189/2022 registered at Police Station – Kunkuri, District – Jashpur (C.G.) for alleged commission of offences under Section 20 B of NDPS Act, 1985.

¶29

As per prosecution, on secret information, the police intercepted two vehicles bearing nos.UP 25DD-0934 and UP25CA-9431. The applicants – Kishan Kumar and Atul Singh were seated in vehicle bearing no.UP25CA9431 and applicants- Pappu Singh and Karan Singh were found seated in vehicle bearing no.UP25DD-0934. From the dickey of vehicle bearing no.UP25CA-9431, total 20.600 kgs of ganja was recovered and from the dickey of vehicle bearing no.UP25DD-0934, 20.300 kgs of ganja was recovered.

¶30

Learned counsel for the applicants would submit that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the case. He further goes to submit that the seizure witnesses have been examined and they have not supported the case of the prosecution. He relies upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Sanjeet Kumar Singh @ Munna Kumar Singh Vs. State of Chhattisgarh reported in 2022 SCC Online SC 1117. Therefore, the applicants may be granted bail.

¶31

On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes prayer and submits that though the seizure witnesses prima facie appears to have not supported the case of the prosecution, the conviction can be sustained only on the basis

¶32

¶33

of statements of other police officials including investigating officer.

¶34

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

¶35

Considering the evidence collected, facts and circumstances of the case, seizure witnesses have not supported the case of the prosecution, reliance placed on the judgment of the Supreme Court in Sanjeet Kumar Singh @ Munna Kumar Singh (supra), considering the detention period of the applicant also, I am inclined to grant bail to the applicants.

¶36

Accordingly, the applications are allowed. It is directed that applicants shall be released on bail on each of them furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- along with one local surety for the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court on the condition that -

¶37

a) They shall appear before the trial Court regularly on each and every date, unless exempted from appearance.

¶38

b) They shall not make any attempt to tamper with the prosecution witnesses.

¶39

If the applicants fail to appear on any date without justifiable reason, trial Court would be at liberty to cancel the bail granted to the applicants.

¶40

Certified copy as per rules.

¶41

Sd/- (Sachin Singh Rajput ) Judge

¶42

Deepti

Karan Singh v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karan Singh 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Surarilal Tamrakar Vs Kishor Kumar Jain

Smt. Priti Sinha Vs Mithalesh Sinha

Ravi Kumar Navik @ Ravi Pokde Vs the State of Chhattisgarh

Heera Singh Gadyan Singh Naik Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Sant Singh @ Buggi Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Rahul Gupta @ Manoj Gupta Vs State of Chhattisgarh