1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
MCRC No. 4121 of 2024
Mayur Rathor S/o Vijay Rathor @ Ramnik Rathor Aged About 38 Years R/o
Station Chowk, Kumhari Ward No. 11, District Durg (C.G.)
---- Applicant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station G.R.P.
Raipur, District – Raipur (C.G.)
---- Non-applicant
(Cause-tile taken from the Case Information System)
For Applicant : Mr. Siddharth Rathod, Advocate.
For Respondent/State : Ms. Ankita Shukla, Panel Lawyer.
Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice
Order on Board
28.06.2024
1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section
439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in
connection with Crime No. 59/2024, registered at Police Station –
G.R.P. Raipur, District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable
under Section 20(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic
Substances Act, 1985, for short, the NDPS Act.
2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that a secret information was
received by the Police of Police Station – G.R.P. Raipur, District –
Raipur (C.G.) through the informant and on the basis of such
information, the Police has seized a total of 12.400 Kgs. of Ganja from
2
the possession of the present applicant. Thereafter, the applicant was
arrested by the Police and the aforesaid offence has been registered.
3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the
applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. It is
submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed in this case. It is also
submitted that from the possession of the applicant intermediate
quantity of the psychotropic substance ganja has been seized, and
therefore, it will not attract the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act as
the commercial quantity of ganja as prescribed under the schedule is
more than 20 kgs and from the possession of the applicant only
12.400 Kgs of Ganja has been seized. It is further submitted that there
are no any criminal antecedents of the applicant, and he is in jail since
27.04.2024 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long
time. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant.
4. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the State opposes the bail
application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the
present case and there are no any criminal antecedents of the
applicant. It is submitted that a total of 12.400 Kgs of Ganja has been
recovered from the possession of the applicant, therefore, his bail
application is liable to be rejected.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material
available on record.
6. After hearing the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the
parties as well as considering the quantity of Ganja seized from the
possession of the applicant i.e. a total of 12.400 Kgs, which is less
than commercial quantity. Also considering the fact that charge-sheet
3
has been filed and there are no any criminal antecedents of the
applicant, and further that the applicant is in jail since 27.04.2024 and
the conclusion of the trial is likely to take sometime, I am of the opinion
that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.
7. Let the applicant, Mayur Rathor involved in Crime No. 59/2024,
registered at Police Station – G.R.P. Raipur, District – Raipur (C.G.)
for the offence punishable under Section 20(B) of the NDPS Act,
1985, be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond with
two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the court concerned
with the following conditions:-
(i) The applicant shall file 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 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail
during trial and in order to secure his presence
proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and
the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date
fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall
4
initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with
law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(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 313 Cr.P.C. 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 them in accordance with law.
8. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall make
earnest endeavour to conclude the trial expeditiously, if there is no
legal impediment.
9. Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial
Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith.
Sd/-
(Ramesh Sinha)
Chief Justice
Rajshekhar