Nafr High Court
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:25868 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4681 of 2025 1 - Dhirendra Sharma S/o Niranjan Sharma Aged About 24 Years R/o Sector 11, Zone 01, Khursipar Police Station Khursipar District - Durg (C.G.) 2 - Yuvraj Mehta S/o Taarkeshwar Mehta Aged About 41 Years R/o Gayatri Nagar Bhilai 03, Police Station Purani Bhilai District - Durg (C.G.) State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer , Police Station Purani Bhilai District - Durg (C.G.) --- Non-applicant --- Applicant along with MCRC No. 4650 of 2025 Anil Kumar Tandon S/o Manthir Ram Tandon Aged About 28 Years R/o Village- Audhi, Ps Old Bhilai District- Durg (C.G.) --- Applicant Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer, Police Station Old Bhilai Distt.- Durg (C.G.) --- Non-applicant along with MCRC No. 4677 of 2025 Vijay Dhurandhar S/o Bhagwati Dhurandhar Aged About 39 Years R/o Street No. 4, Devendra Nagar, Raipur Chhattisgarh. --- Applicant Versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer, Police Station Old Bhilai District Durg Chhattisgarh. --- Non-applicant RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 For Applicant For Non-Applicant/State : :
Legal Reasoning
Ms. Anju Sharma, Advocate. Ms. Shubha Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 19/06/2025 1. Since the above-mentioned three first bail applications arise out of same incident and registered at same police station, they are clubbed and heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. 2. These are the First bail applications filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for grant of regular bail to the applicants namely Dhirendra Sharma, Yuvraj Mehta, Vijay Dhurandhar (Constable, Dial 112), and Anil Kumar Tandon (Driver, Dial 112) who have been arrested in connection with Crime Nos. 124/2025 and 126/2025 registered at Police Station – Old Bhilai, Durg, District- Durg, (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. 3. As per the prosecution, on 30.03.2025, acting on secret information, the police intercepted an XUV500 (CG 22 AC 5656) driven by applicant Dhirendra Sharma, with co-accused Yuvraj Mehta as co-passenger. During the search, the police allegedly seized 12.394 kg of ganja kept in six packets, from the vehicle, which was registered in the name of Dhirendra’s mother. The ganja was said to be in joint possession of both Dhirendra and Yuvraj. 4. In a connected incident, co-accused Vijay Dhurandhar (Constable) 3 and Anil Kumar Tandon (Driver) of the Dial 112 vehicle are alleged to have tempered with the seizure. It is alleged that though three packets of Ganja were found during vehicle checking, but they intentionally recorded only two in the ofÏcial records and concealed one packet in the bushes. Later, based on secret information, 6.398 kg of ganja was allegedly recovered from the house of applicant Anil Kumar Tandon. 5. On the basis of this investigation, the prosecution claims that all four applicants were involved in illegal transportation and concealment of ganja, and charge-sheets have been filed against them. 6. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the present applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. She further submits that the alleged contraband Ganja seized from the possession of the co-accused persons is less than the commercial quantity. She also submits that the seizure and sampling were carried out in clear violation of Circular 1/89 issued by the Narcotics Control Bureau, which has been held to be mandatory and binding by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Noor Aga v. State of Punjab, (2008) 16 SCC 417. It is further submitted that the investigation conducted by the investigating agency vitiates the proceedings, and the bar under Section 37, which applies to offences involving commercial quantity, does not apply in the present case as the prosecution has failed to establish the actual quantity of contraband seized. It is pertinent to note that 4 various High Courts have considered the aforesaid circular and have granted bail in similar circumstances, including the Hon’ble High Court of Madhya Pradesh in MCRC No. 19405 of 2022 (order dated 19.04.2022), the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in Basant Rai v. State, 2012 (130) DRJ 471, and the Hon’ble High Court of Telangana in Baba Sow Chandekar v. State of Telangana, CrMP No. 4428 of 2022 (order dated 05.07.2022). She further submits that all the applicants have no criminal antecedents and the applicants namely Dhirendra Sharma and Yuvraj Mehta are in jail since 30.03.2025 and the applicants namely Vijay Dhurandhar and Anil Kumar Tandon are in jail since 01.04.2025 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. Therefore, she prays for grant of regular bail to the applicants. 7. On the other hand, learned Panel Lawyer opposes the bail application of the applicants and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court. She further submits that the quantity of contraband article i.e. total 12.394 kg of ganja kept in six packets has been seized from the possession of the applicants without any valid licence and no plausible explanation has been given in this regard, therefore, all the applicants are not entitled for grant of bail. 8. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 9. Considering the fact and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence levelled against the applicants and the fact that acting upon secret information, the police intercepted an XUV500 5 (CG 22 AC 5656), driven by applicant Dhirendra Sharma with co- accused Yuvraj Mehta as co-passenger, and allegedly recovered 12.394 kg of Ganja kept in six packets, from their joint possession. In a connected incident, co-accused Vijay Dhurandhar (Constable) and Anil Kumar Tandon (Driver) of the Dial 112 vehicle are alleged to have tampered with the seizure. Further though three packets of Ganja were found during checking, they intentionally recorded only two in the ofÏcial records and concealed one packet in the bushes. Later, based on secret information, 6.398 kg of Ganja was recovered from the house of applicant Anil Kumar Tandon. On pointed query to the learned counsel for the applicants regarding the recovery from the Dial 112 vehicle and the concealment of the contraband, no plausible explanation could be furnished. Further considering the fact that the quantity of contraband seized from the possession of all the applicants without any valid licence and no plausible explanation has been offered in this regard, and prima facie involvement of all applicants in an organised illegal transportation and concealment of narcotic substance. Furthermore, considering the gravity and seriousness of this case and it cannot be a case of false implication, this Court is of the view that it is not a fit case to enlarge all the applicants on bail. 10. Accordingly, these bail applications of the applicants namely Dhirendra Sharma, Yuvraj Mehta, Vijay Dhurandhar and Anil Kumar Tandon, involved in Crime Nos. 124/2025 and 126/2025 registered at Police Station – Old Bhilai, Durg, District- Durg, (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the 6 Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, is rejected at this stage. 11. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 12. OfÏce is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - Rahul Dewangan Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice