Rajvinder Singh @ Laddu S/o Arjun Singh Aged About 32 Years R/o Housing Board v. State Of Chhattisgarh Through - The Station House OfÏcer Police Station Mohan Nagar, District
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:43655 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6096 of 2025 Rajvinder Singh @ Laddu S/o Arjun Singh Aged About 32 Years R/o Housing Board, Lig-2, Quarter No. 331, 32 Acre, Police Station Vaishali Nagar, District- Durg (C.G.), Permanent R/o Village- Talvandi, Dasoda Singh Police Station Katthu, Nangal, District- Amritsar (Punjab), (As Per Charge Sheet) --- Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - The Station House OfÏcer Police Station Mohan Nagar, District – Durg (C.G.) --- Respondent Along with MCRC No. 6322 of 2025 Gurudev Singh @ Deva @ Devi Singh S/o Samma Singh Aged About 37 Years R/o Village- Mohkamwala @ Araiyawala, P.S. Makku, Tahsil Makku Jira, District Firozpur (Punjab) Versus ---Applicant State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Mohan Nagar, District Durg C.G. ---- Non-applicant For Applicants :
Legal Reasoning
Mr. Rudranath Mukherjee, Advocate, as well as Mr. M.P.S. Bhatia, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Mr. Amit Verma, Panel Lawyer. RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 28.08.2025 Order on Board 1. The applicants have preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as they have arrested in connection with Crime No. 147/2025, registered at Police Station – Mohan Nagar, District – Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 21(B) and 27(A) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, for short, the NDPS Act. 2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that a secret information was received 2 by the Police of Police Station – Mohan Nagar, District – Durg (C.G.) through the informant and on the basis of such information, the Police has seized a total of 150 Grams of Heroin from the possession of the co- accused, and name of the applicants came into light from the memorandum statement of the co-accused person. Thereafter, the applicants was arrested by the Police and the aforesaid offence has been registered. 3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. It is submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed in this case. It is also submitted that no such seizure of contraband article has been made from the possession of the applicants as a total of 150 Grams of Heroin has found from the possession of the co-accused, Gurudev Singh Virk, which is less than the commercial quantity i.e. 250 Grams. It is further submitted that there are no any criminal antecedents of the applicants, and they are in jail since 18.04.2025 and 11.05.2025 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicants. 4. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case and there are no any criminal antecedents of the applicants. It is submitted that a total of 150 Grams of Heroin has been recovered from the possession of the co-accused, and name of the applicants came into light from the memorandum statement of the co- accused person, therefore, this bail application is liable to be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material 3 available on record. 6. After hearing the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties as well as considering the fact that no such seizure of contraband article has been made from the possession of the applicants as a total of 150 Grams of Heroin has found from the possession of the co-accused, Gurudev Singh Virk, which is less than the commercial quantity i.e. 250 Grams. Also considering the fact that charge-sheet has been filed, and further that the applicants are in jail since 18.04.2025 and 11.05.2025, the conclusion of the trial is likely to take sometime, I am of the opinion that the applicants is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the applicants, Rajvinder Singh @ Laddu and Gurudev Singh @ Deva @ Devi Singh involved in Crime No. 147/2025, registered at Police Station – Mohan Nagar, District – Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 21(B) and 27(A) of the NDPS Act, 1985, be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond with two local sureties 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 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 applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. 4 (iii) In case, the applicants misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicants fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (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 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 earnest endeavour to conclude the trial expeditiously, preferably within a period of six months from the date of passing of this order, if there is no legal impediment. 9. OfÏce is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rajshekhar