High CourtsSingle Bench(2018) 04 CHH CK 0192

Permeshwer Rajput vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh High Court · Decided on 16 April 2018

HON’BLE JUDGES
P. SAM KOSHY, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
M.Cr.C. No.933 of 2018

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

25 paragraphs · 496 words
1.

The applicant has preferred this bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. in connection with Crime No.180/2017 registered at Police Station

Kusmunda, District Korba (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 25 of NDPS Act.

2.

Present applicant is in jail since 13/11/2017.

3.

The allegation against the present applicant as per the prosecution case is that, on the date of incident i.e. on 13/11/2017, the police authorities found

three persons namely Israil, Barun and one Somnath traveling in an Innova Car bearing registration No.OR-02-BZ-6888 and in the said vehicle, these

three persons were carrying 4 Plastic Bags of Cannabis weighing 90 Kgs 750 Grams and the accused persons were arrested immediately on

13/11/2017 itself.

4.

The counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant has been arrested only on the ground that the present applicant is said to be the

owner of the said Innova Car. However he submits that till date, the vehicle has not been transferred in the name of the present applicant and the

registered owner of the said vehicle still is one Chitranjan and only by virtue of an agreement to sale, the present applicant has been implicated in the

case and thus prayed for releasing the applicant on bail.

5.

The State counsel however opposing the application submits that there is an agreement of sale entered into between Chitranjan and the present

applicant on 26/08/2017 and thereafter the incident took place on 14/09/2017 and therefore it is prima-facie clear that after the agreement to sale, the

vehicle was in the possession of the present applicant and he had used the vehicle for transportaion of Cannabis and thus prayed for rejection of

appeal.

6.

Having heard the contention put forth on either side and on perusal of record, except for the agreement to sale entered into between Chitranjan and

the present applicant dated 26/08/2017, there does not appear to be any other material available against the present applicant establishing the fact that

he was involved in the transportation of Cannabis on the date of incident. Moreover, the other three persons-the accused persons have already been

arrested on 14/09/2017.

7.

Given the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case particularly taking note of the fact that the present applicant is not the registered owner of

the vehicle and that except for the agreement to sale entered into between Chitranjan and the present applicant, there being no other material available

on record, this Court is of the opinion that, prima-facie, a strong case has been made out for grant of bail to the present applicant.

8.

Accordingly, the application for grant of bail is allowed. It is ordered that the applicant shall be released on bail on his executing a personal bond for

a sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Trial Court. The applicant shall thereafter appear before the

Trial Court on each and every date given by the said court.