Allowed

Aman Soni v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC17 Mar 2023MCRC/417/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed second bail applications filed by two applicants accused under Sections 21 and 22 of the NDPS Act. The Court granted bail after noting the prolonged detention, pending trial, and hostility of seizure witnesses, imposing a bond and restrictions on movement and witness tampering.

What did the court decide?

Applicants released on bail by furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000 along with one local surety for the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

Aman Soni Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Narcotics (NDPS) | Chhattisgarh HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

MCRC No. 1217 of 2023

¶5

Zavier Anthony S/o George Anthony, Aged About 37 Years R/o Tarbahar, Indira Colony, Near Water Tank, Police Station - Tarbahar, Tahsil And District - Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ---- Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Officer, Police Station - Tarbahar, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent

¶8

with

¶9

MCRC No. 417 of 2023

¶10

Aman Soni S/o Late Ramkhilawan Soni, Aged About 22 Years R/o Near Gyan Palace, Sarju Bagicha, Telipara, Bilaspur, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

¶11

---- Applicant

¶12

Versus

¶13

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Tarbahar (Wrongly Mentioned As Gourela), District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

¶14

--- Respondent

¶15

Mr. Amit Singh Chauhan, counsel for the applicants. Mr. Sameer Oraon, GA for the State/respondent.

¶16

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput

¶17

Order On Board

¶18

17/03/2023

¶19

Since, both the cases are arising out of same crime number, therefore, they are being decided by this common order.

¶20

The applicants have preferred this Second bail application under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail as they are in custody in connection with crime No. 181 of 2022 registered in Police Station Tarbahar, District Bilaspur, CG for ofence punishable under Sections 21 and 22 of NDPS Act. The frst bail application was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to revive the prayer after examination of material witnesses

¶21

¶22

vide order dated 15.11.2022 passed in MCRC No. 8157 of 2022 and other connected matters.

¶23

Case of the prosecution in brief is that on 31.08.2022, the police of police station, Tarbahar received information from informant to the efect that the accused persons are in possession of Codeine substance for sale. On the basis of said information, the police personnel conducted raid and allegedly recovered 50 pieces Wincirex Cough Syrup containing 100 ML each total 5000 ML from the applicant and co-accuse Xavier Anthony, out of which, 10 pieces Wincirex Cough Syrup has been recovered from the present applicant.

¶24

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicants have not committed any ofence and have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that the seizure witnesses have not supported the case of the prosecution and have declared hostile and there is no antecedent of the applicants, they are in jail since 31.08.2022, trial is not concluded as yet, charge-sheet has already been fled, therefore, they may be released on bail. He further relied upon the judgment of Hon’ble the Supreme Court

¶25

in the case of Sanjeet Kumar Singh @ Munna Kumar Singh Vs. State

¶26

of Chhattisgarh reported in 2022 SCC Online SC 1117.

¶27

On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes bail application and submits that the other witnesses are yet to be examined and conviction can be sustained on the strength of other witnesses including the investigating ofcer.

¶28

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and considered the rival submissions.

¶29

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, looking to the detention period, trial is likely to take some time; Charge-sheet has already been fled and seizure witnesses have not supported the case of

¶30

¶31

the prosecution and judgments relied by counsel for the applicants in the case of Sanjeet Kumar Singh (supra), without commenting on merits, I am inclined to grant bail to the applicants.

¶32

Accordingly, the applications are allowed. It is directed that the 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 -

¶33

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

¶34

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

¶35

c) They shall not leave the territory of Chhattisgarh without permission of the trial Court.

¶36

It is made clear that the State is at liberty to move application regarding cancellation of bail of the applicants in the event applicants involve themselves in similar ofence in future.

¶37

Certifed copy as per rules.

¶38

Sd/-

¶39

( Sachin Singh Rajput ) Judge

¶40

Pawan

Aman Soni v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aman Soni 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

Marimuthu Vs the State of M.P.

Vikram Sarthi Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Vitthal Meena Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Vishnu Sahu Vs M/s Deepak Tractors and Agricultural

Jitendra Kumar Sethiya Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Pappu Hela @ Pappu Heliya Vs State of Chhattisgarh