Rajendra Sahu v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT of CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 277 of 2021 • Rajendra Sahu son of Shri Sopadi Lal Sahu, aged about 24 years, Caste-Teli, R/o Bhuneshwarpur (Chikhlapara), Tahsil and Police Station Ramanujnagar, District Surajpur Chhattisgarh ------Applicant

VERSUS

• State of Chhattisgarh through: Police Station- Ramanujnagar, District Surajpur, Chhattisgarh -------Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Pawan Kumar Kashyap, Advocate For Respondent- State : Mr. Anand Verma, Deputy Government Adv. Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge

ORDER

24/03/2021 1.

Applicant has preferred this application under Section 439 of CrPC for grant of regular bail as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.191/2020 registered at Police Station Ramanujnagar, District Surajpur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 21(C) of Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. 2.

Case of the prosecution is that, on 01.11.2020, on routine patrolling, secret information was received by the police of police station Ramanujnagar, on the basis of which, search of the house of present applicant has been made. During the search of present applicant and his house, police seized 20 number of Spasmo Proxyvon capsule from his pants' pocket and during the search of his house, found 390 strips, each strip contains 8 number capsule, total 3120 capsule and 1080 strips of Alprasafe 0.5mg capsule, each strip contains 10 capsules, total 10800 capsules and Rs.13,580/- from the sale of drug substance.

3.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is falsely implicated in the crime. He has not committed any offence as alleged against him.

4.

Learned counsel representing the State, while opposing the bail application, submits that the quantity seized from the possession of the present applicant comes within the commercial quantity and in view of Section 37 of the Narcotic Drug & Psychotropic Substances Act, applicant is not entitled to grant bail.

5.

I have heard learned counsel for the respective parties. 6.

Taking into consideration the quantity of drugs recovered from the possession of the present applicant, I do not find it a fit case to enlarge the applicant on Bail.

7.

Accordingly, Bail application is dismissed.

Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Pawan