Mayankraj Mishra And Another v. State Of Chhattisgarh
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR M.Cr.C.No.5699 of 2020
1. Mayankraj Mishra S/o Ashok Kumar Mishra, aged about 19 years, resident of village-Barhee. Post-Pipariya, Shukl Barhee, District-Katnee (M.P.) Present halting:- Shivanand Nagar Sector-3, Raipur, District-Raipur (CG)
2. Chainkumar Varma S/o Radheshyam Varma Aged about 28 years, Resident of village-Palari, Police Station-Palari, District-Balauda-Bazar (CG) Present Address: Bhanpuri, Raipur (CG) ---Applicants
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh Through its Police Station-Baloda, District-Kabirdham (CG) ---Non-Applicant For Applicants :
Mr.B.L.Sahu, Advocate For Non-applicant :
Mr.Jitendra Pali, Dy.A.G.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order on Board 21/09/2020 1.
Proceedings of this matter have been taken-up through video conferencing.
2.
The accused/applicants have moved this bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for release them on regular bail during trial in connection with Crime No.162/2020, registered at Police StationBodala, Distt.Kabirdham (CG), for the offence punishable under Section 20(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985. 3.
Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that 6.500 kg. of ganja was recovered from possession of the present applicants and thereby committed the aforesaid offence.
4.
Learned counsel for the applicants would submit that the applicants have not committed any offence and they have falsely been implicated in crime in question. He would further submit that the applicants have been arrested on 27.7.2020 and the trial is likely to take time for its conclusion, as such, the
applicants may be released on regular bail.
5.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the State would oppose the bail application.
6.
I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary.
7.
Taking into consideration the facts & circumstances of the case, nature & gravity of offence, pre-trial detention of the applicants, quantity of ganja, this Court is of the opinion that present is a fit case, in which, the applicants should be enlarged on regular bail.
8.
Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. is allowed.
9.
It is directed that the applicants shall be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond in the sum of ₹ 25,000/- each with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court, for their appearance as and when directed.
10.
It is made clear that if the applicants have already been released on bail pursuant to the bail bonds already furnished in view of the order passed by the High Power Committee constituted in compliance of the order of the Supreme Court of India dated 23.3.2020 in the matter of In Re : Contagion of COVID 19 Virus in Prisons (Suo Motu Writ Petition (C) No.1/2020), they need not furnish bail bonds afresh and the bail bonds already furnished shall be deemed to be the bail bonds furnished in compliance of the order of this Court, but if they have not furnished bail bonds earlier, then they will be required to furnish bail bonds. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) JUDGE B/-