Nafr High Court
Case Details
2025:CGHC:47820 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7478 of 2025 Rupendra Singh Chouhan S/o Shri Shivraj Singh Chouhan Aged About 20 Years R/o Village- Mahalpur Chhura, Thana- Rudawal, Tahsil Rupvass, District- Bharatpur Rajasthan ( Correct Address Mentioned As Per Adhar Cord ) ...Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through, Station House Officer, Police Station Kabeer Nagar, Distt- Raipur ( C.G. ). ... Respondent VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2025.09.18 11:37:20 +0530 For Applicant
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. Aniruddha Shrivastava, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 17.09.2025 Order on Board 1. 2. The applicant has preferred this Second Bail Application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 129/2024, registered at Police Station : Kabeer Nagar District – Raipur (C.G) for the offence punishable under Section 20-B, 20(C)and 29 of NDPS Act. The prosecution story in short s that on May 29, 2024, a secret Police Station-Kabeer Nagar, Raipur received information following which a 2 white Venue Car with registration number CG-04-NB-7941 was intercepted at Jarvay BSUP Colony Kabeer Nagar, Raipur. Two persons, Ajay Goure Urf Boby and Azruddin Qureshi, were found sitting in the car. A joint seizure of 60.468 kg of cannabis/ganja was made from them. After recorded the memorandum of accused persons the Police arrested the present applicant and other co- accused in the alleged commission of offence. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated and there is no material on record to show that he was in exclusive or conscious possession of the alleged contraband. The entire case rests only on the memorandum statement of a co- accused, which is not substantive evidence in law. It is further submitted that the co-accused have already been granted bail by the Hon’ble Supreme Court (25.07.2025) and this Hon’ble Court (21.08.2025 & 04.09.2025). The mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act relating to search and seizure were not complied with, as the applicant was never informed of his right to be searched before a Gazetted Officer or Magistrate, no proper panchnama or sealing was prepared, and the samples were not sealed with the SHO’s seal before being deposited in the malkhana, which reflects faulty investigation. The applicant has been in judicial custody since 30.05.2024 (over 15 months). Out of 20 prosecution witnesses, only 7 have been examined so far, and there is no likelihood of early conclusion of trial. Mere recovery of commercial quantity is not enough to justify prolonged incarceration, particularly when the trial is delayed. The applicant is a young boy of 20 years, pursuing B.A. first 4. 5. 6. year, with no criminal antecedents. His continued detention would irreparably harm his education and career prospects. He is a permanent resident of the given address, with no likelihood of absconding or tampering with witnesses, and undertakes to abide by any conditions imposed by this Hon’ble Court therefore, the applicant is also entitled to be released on regular bail. On the other hand learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the offence, and the period of detention of the applicant since 29.05.2024, and also considering the fact that the co- accused, namely Kanhaiya, has been granted regular bail by the Hon’ble Apex Court vide order dated 25.07.2025 in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 7841/2025, and other co-accused, namely Ajay Goure @ Boby and Azruddin Qureshi, have been granted regular bail by this Court vide orders dated 21.08.2025 and 04.09.2025 in MCRC No. 6218 of 2025 and MCRC No. 7066 of 2025 respectively, and further, as the case of the present applicant is identical to that of the aforementioned co-accused persons, and the charge-sheet has already been filed in the present case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 7. Let the Second Bail of the Applicant – Rupendra Singh Chouhan, involved in Crime No. 129/2024, registered at Police Station : Kabeer Nagar District – Raipur (C.G) for the offence punishable under Section 20-B, 20(C)and 29 of NDPS Act, 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 his absence, without sufficient 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 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 sufficient 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. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/-/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaibhav