Nafr High Court
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:45086 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5890 of 2025 Subhash Muduli S/o Bhogu Muduli Aged About 28 Years R/o Village Khomra, Police Station- Padwa, Tehsil Nandpur, District- Koraput Odisha, At Present R/o- Near Yamaha Showroom, Bread Factory, Simliguda, Odisha. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House OfÏcer, Nagarnar, District- Bastar Chhattisgarh. ... Non-applicant For Applicant
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. Ali Afzaal Mirza, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Sakib Ahmed, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 03/09/2025 Order on Board 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 138/2025 registered at Police Station- Nagarnaar District -Bastar (Jagdalpur), (C.G.) for the offence under Section 20(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the police of Police Station Nagarnaar, District Bastar (Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh, received a secret information regarding illegal possession of contraband. RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 Acting on the said information, the police conducted a raid and seized 6.500 kg of Ganja from the possession of co-accused Abhinav Rai in the concerned crime number. During investigation, the present applicant was implicated solely on the basis of the memorandum statement of co-accused Abhinav Rai. Subsequently, the memorandum statement of the present applicant was also recorded, wherein it was alleged that the seized contraband was sold by the present applicant to co-accused Abhinav Rai. Based on these statements, an offence punishable under Section 20(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 was registered against the present applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that seized 6.500 Kgs of Ganja was not seized from the possession of the present applicant. He further submits that the present applicant has been implicated solely on the basis of the memorandum statement of co-accused Abhinav Rai. The police have seized alleged contraband from the possession of the co- accused and in order to save themselves they have implicated the present applicant. He also submits that prosecution agency has not followed the provisions under Section 42 of the NDPS Act. He further submits that one another FIR bearing Crime No. 137/2025 has been registered against the present applicant by the police on the same day with same allegation and he is in jail since 08.06.2025 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail 3 application of the present applicant and submit that the charge- sheet has already been filed in the present case before the competent Court and also endorse the submission made by the learned counsel for the applicant. He further submits that a huge quantity of contraband, i.e., 6.500 kg of Ganja, has been seized from the possession of co-accused Abhinav Rai. It is further submitted that during investigation, the memorandum statement of co-accused Abhinav Rai clearly disclosed the involvement of the present applicant, stating that the said contraband was procured from him. Thereafter, the memorandum of the present applicant was recorded, which corroborates this fact. He also contends that this clearly establishes a direct nexus between the applicant and the seized contraband, showing his active participation in the illegal trade, therefore, the present applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case that the contraband article was not seized from the possession of the present applicant, the police have seized alleged contraband from the possession of the co-accused and one another FIR bearing Crime No. 137/2025 has been registered against the present applicant by the police on the same day with same allegation and also considering the fact that in the present bail application the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and he is in jail since 08.06.2025 and conclusion of the trial may take some 4 time, therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the Applicant – Subhash Muduli, involved in Crime No. 138/2025 registered at Police Station- Nagarnaar District -Bastar (Jagdalpur), (C.G.) for the offence under Section 20(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two local sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he 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 applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of her absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial 5 court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicant 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 applicant is 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 him in accordance with law. 8. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall make an earnest endeavour to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible within a period of six months from the receipt of a certified copy of this order in accordance with law, if there is no legal impediment. 9. OfÏce is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Rahul Dewangan Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice