Dismissed

Rajbahadur Singh v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC6 Oct 2023MCRC/5227/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Chhattisgarh rejected a bail application filed by two accused persons caught with over 880 kgs of ganja. The court held that the gravity of the offence precluded release on bail despite alleged procedural contradictions in the charge-sheet.

What did the court decide?

Bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. rejected; accused persons not released on bail.

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

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

M.Cr.C. No. 5227 of 2023

¶5

Rajbahadur Singh, son of Kedar Singh, aged about 34 years, resident of Benpura Mafi Bahadur, Tahsil Badi, District Gholpur (Rajasthan)

¶6

Raju Gond, son of Vinod Lal Gond, aged 28 years, resident of village Tehri, Police Station Kolari, District Gholpur (Rajasthan)

¶7

---- Applicants

¶8

Versus

¶9

State of Chhattisgarh, Through – Investigation Officer, Narcotic Control Bureau (NCB), Regional Unit, Indore (Madhya Pradesh)

¶10

----Non-applicant

¶11

For Applicants : Mr. Vijay Kumar Mishra & Mr. Yogesh

¶12

Bihari Ghore, Advocate.

¶13

For Non-applicant : Mr. S.S. Baghel, Standing counsel for NCB & Mr. Shresth Gupta, P.L.

¶14

Hon'ble Mr. Justice N.K. Chandravanshi

¶15

Order On Board

¶16

06-10-2023

¶17

The accused/applicants have moved this bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for releasing them on regular bail in connection with Crime No. 07/2022 (NCB, Indore) registered at Narcotic Control Bureau (NCB), Regional Unit, Indore (Madhya Pradesh) for commission of offence punishable under Sections 08, 20(C), 25, 27-A read with Section 29 of the NDPS Act.

¶18

Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on the basis of secret information received from the official of NCB Indore, Toyota Etioscross

¶19

¶20

Car bearing registration No. U.P.-93-A.R.-7980 & Eicher Truck bearing registration No. RJ-11-GA-6990 were intercepted and during search 38.13 kgs. Ganja was found in aforesaid Car whereas 847.02 kgs. ganja was found in the aforesaid truck. Applicant No. 1- Rajbahadur Singh was driving the aforesaid Truck and applicant No. 2 – Raju Gond was sitting in the said Truck as Cleaner whereas four other co-accused persons were travelling in the aforesaid Car. Said 38.13 kgs ganja and 847.02 kgs ganja were seized from joint possession of all six accused persons. Applicants have been arrested on 20.05.2022. After usual investigation, charge-sheet has been filed on 05.11.2022.

¶21

Learned counsel appearing for the applicants would submit that the applicants are innocent persons and have been falsely implicated in the crime in question. He submits that as per case of the prosecution, applicant No. 1 was driving the aforesaid truck at the time of incident but copy of driving licence filed with the charge-sheet is of one Bhagwan Das Gond. It is further submitted that at one point of time place of seizure has been shown as National Highway 30 in seizure memo but in another document it has been shown as Police Chowki – Dashrangpur. Similarly, there are various contradictions in respect of Malkhana that whether it is in Police Station Dashrangpur or not. Learned counsel for the applicants further draw attention of this Court in respect of other various contradictions available in the documents attached with the charge-sheet. It is further submitted that Anil Chandrakar (PW-1) & Sukhram Sahu (PW-2), who are search & seizure witnesses of the incident, copy of which has been filed by the applicants, have been

¶22

¶23

declared hostile by the prosecution, as they have not supported the case of the prosecution. He would next submit that the applicants are in detention since 20.5.2022 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time, hence, they may be enlarged on bail.

¶24

Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent – NCB, Indore, while opposing the bail application, would submit that the applicants were transporting quintals of contraband substance ganja, which was seized from the vehicle, in which they were travelling and they were also caught by the officials of NCB, Indore. Hence, considering the aforesaid facts, the bail application filed by the applicants is liable to be dismissed.

¶25

I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary with utmost circumspection.

¶26

Having heard learned counsel for the parties, having regard to the facts & circumstances of the case, particularly, considering the fact that more than 880 kgs. Ganja have been seized from joint possession of the applicants and the fact that applicants were also caught on the spot by the officials of NCB, Indore. Hence, considering the nature & gravity of the offence, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail.

¶27

Accordingly, the bail application under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. filed by the applicants is hereby rejected.

¶28

Sd/-

¶29

(N.K.Chandravanshi) Judge

¶30

Amit/

¶31

¶32

Rajbahadur Singh v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajbahadur 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ashok Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Jeevan Lakra Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Keshav Markandey Vs the State of Chhattisgarh

Krishna Kumar Markam Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Steal Auth. of India Ltd. Bhilai and Anr. Vs Shailendra Thakur and Ors.

Rustam Khan Vs State of Chhattisgarh