1 - Laljee Nishad S/o Vishnu Nishad Aged About 34 Years R/o Ward No v. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Staion House Officer, Police Station Gariyaband, District Gariyaband
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:17219 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1516 of 2025 1 - Laljee Nishad S/o Vishnu Nishad Aged About 34 Years R/o Ward No. 13, Malgaon, Police Station Gariyaband, District Gariyaband (C.G.) 2 - Narendra Yadav S/o Pardeshi Yadav Aged About 19 Years R/o Ward No. 13, Malgaon, Police Station Gariyaband, District Gariyaband (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Staion House Officer, Police Station Gariyaband, District Gariyaband (C.G.) ... Respondent(s)
Legal Reasoning
ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.04.21 14:41:26 +0530 For Applicant(s) : Mr. Jitendra Shukla, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Malay Jain, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 15/04/2025 1. Proceedings of this matter have been taken through video conferencing. 2 2. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 13/2025 registered at Police Station Gariyaband, District Gariyaband (C.G.) under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. 3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the Police of Police Station Gariyaband, District Gariyaband (C.G.) seized 4.028 Kgs of contraband article i.e. Ganja from the possession of applicants, thereafter, aforesaid offence has been registered against the applicants and subsequently, they were arrested. Hence, the bail application. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have falsely been implicated in this case and the contraband Ganja was not seized from the exclusive possession of the applicants. He further submits that that prosecution agency has not followed the provisions under Section 42 of the NDPS Act and not taken search warrant from the superior authority. He also submits that from the joint possession of the applicants intermediate quantity of the psychotropic substance ganja has been seized, and therefore, it will not attract the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act as the commercial quantity of ganja as prescribed under the schedule is more than 20 Kgs and from the joint possession of the applicants only 4.028 Kgs Ganja has been seized. He later submits that the applicant No.1 has four criminal antecedent, out of which, two cases 3 are under the Excise Act, one case is under the Gambling Act and one case is of preventive measure and applicant No.2 has no criminal antecedent, they are in jail since 26.01.2025 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicants. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State/non- applicant would oppose the bail application and submit that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court and submits that applicant No.1 has four criminal antecedents, out of which, two cases are under the Excise Act, one case is under the Gambling Act and one case is of preventive measure and applicant No.2 has no criminal antecedent. He further submits that from the joint possession of the applicants contraband article i.e. 4.028 Kgs of Ganja is seized, therefore, the applicants are not entitled for grant of bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the applicant No.1 has four criminal antecedents, out of which, two cases are under the Excise Act, one case is under the Gambling Act and one case is of preventive measure, but the said applicant has no criminal antecedent under the NDPS Act, so far as applicant No.2 is concerned, applicant No.2 has no criminal antecedent, further the contraband article i.e. 4.028 Kgs of Ganja recovered from the joint possession of the applicants is less than the commercial quantity and the charge-sheet has been filed in the 4 present case before the competent Court, this Court is of the view that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this case. 8. Let the Applicants - Laljee Nishad and Narendra Yadav, involved in Crime No. 13/2025 registered at Police Station Gariyaband, District Gariyaband (C.G.) under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, be released on bail on their furnishing personal bond with two sureties each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. 5 (iv) The applicants shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicants are deliberate or without sufÏcient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against them in accordance with law. 9. OfÏce is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Abhishek