AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Since the above-mentioned two first bail applications arise out of same incident, same crime number and registered at same police station, they are clubbed and heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.
The applicants have preferred these First Bail Applications under Section 483 the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, they have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 81/2026 registered at Police Station Sankra, District Mahasamund (C.G.) for the offence under Section 20(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.
Case of the prosecution, in brief is that on the basis of information given by the informer police of police station Sankra, District Mahasamund (C.G.) made search of vehicle XUV No. MH-12JU-8769 and Dezire Car No.MH-24AF-2235 and seized 12.563 kg of Ganja from the possession of co-accused person and present applicant. Thereafter police has registered the FIR against the applicant and they were arrested. Consequently, the present bail applications have been preferred by the applicants.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that afore-stated quantity of Ganja has not been seized from the possession of the present applicants but the same has been seized from open place therefore offence is not made out against the present applicants. He further submits that charge-sheet been filed and the contraband article is less than commercial quantity. He also submits that conclusion of trial is likely to take time and other co-accused has also been enlarged on bail, therefore instant bail applications may kindly be allowed.
On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State/non-applicant would oppose the bail applications and submits that the charge-sheets have been filed in the present cases before the competent Court and also endorse the said submission that the applicant have 01 criminal antecedent under the NDPS Act. She further submits that from the possession of the applicants contraband article i.e. 12.563 Kgs of Ganja was seized, therefore, they are not entitled for grant of regular bail.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.
Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case that the contraband article i.e. 12.563 kg of Ganja was recovered from the possession of the applicants, which is less than commercial quantity. Moreover, the present applicants have 01 criminal antecedent each under the NDPS Act. Also considering the fact that the charge-sheets have been filed in the present cases before the competent Court and the applicants are in jail since 26.04.2026, conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this case.
Let the Applicants – Ranjit Rajendra Gholap and Manoj Rangnath Sangle, involved in Crime No. 81/2026 registered at Police Station Sankra, District Mahasamund (C.G.) for the offence under Section 20(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:-
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.
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.
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.
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.
Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance.