The right to file a fresh bail application persists despite earlier rejections if circumstances allow for it.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUBODH ABHYANKAR st ON THE 31 OF JULY, 2025 MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 19804 of 2025 NURUDDIN @ SONU Versus NARCOTICS CELL INDORE DISTRICT INDORE Appearance:

Dr. Khuzema Kapadia - Advocate for the applicant.

Shri Tarun Pagare-Govt. Adv.appearing on behalf of Advocate General.

ORDER th

1 . This is the applicant's 6 application filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 ( under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 ) for grant of bail, as he/she is implicated in connection with Crime No.39/2020, registered at Police Station Narcotics Cell, District Indore (MP) for offence punishable under Sections 8/22, 29 of the NDPS Act. The applicant is in custody since 29.06.2020. Applicant's earlier bail applications have already been dismissed on merits; whereas his two SLPs. viz; SLP (Crl.) no.3882/2023 and SLP(Crl.) no. 4554/2024 have also been rejected by the Supreme Court.

2. The allegation against is that he was also involved in the aforesaid case wherein, 55 gm of MD (Mefedron) has been seized from the possession of the applicant, the commercial quantity of which is 50 gm.

Signature Not Verified

3. Counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is lodged in jail since last around five years i.e., since 29.6.2020, and although the trial of the applicant is at the fag end however, since the absconding accused-Abdul Gaffar has been arrested subsequently, and a supplementary charge sheet has been filed against him on 25.10.2024, the learned Judge of the trial court is now proceeding with the aforesaid case of co-accused Abdul Gaffar by keeping the present case in abeyance, and now 10 more witnesses are still to be examined by the trial court in the case of Abdul Gabbar; whereas only one witness has been examined in the said trial. Thus, it is submitted that the applicant deserves to be released on bail, looking to the period of incarceration.

4. Counsel for the applicant has also relied upon the decision rendered by the Supreme Court in the case of Vipin Kumar vs. State of U.P. ( Criminal Appeal no. 726/2025 (Arising out of SLP (Crl.) no.179918/2024) dated 13.02.2025 wherein, the Court has reiterated that there is no prohibition in filing a fresh application for bail after the earlier application was rejected or cancelled, if granted and it is the right of the accused to apply for fresh bail application and fresh permission from the Supreme Court for filing the application would not be necessary.

5. Counsel for the respondent/State, on the other hand, has opposed the prayer and it is submitted that the application itself is not maintainable as the applicant's two Special Leave Petitions viz; SLP (Crl.) no.3882/2023 and SLP(Crl.) no. 4554/2024, have already been rejected by the Supreme Court on 15.5.2023 and 04.04.2024 respectively. It is submitted that the SLP(Crl.) no. 4554/2024 was dismissed despite the fact that the earlier SLP was Signature Not Verified dismissed on 15.5.2023, with a direction to the trial court to conclude the same within six months’ time and thereafter, when the trial could not be concluded, his subsequent application has also been dismissed by the High Court as well as the Supreme Court. Thus, it is submitted that no case for grant of bail is made out.

6. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.

7. The first question before this court is whether the present application can be entertained by this court when his earlier two applications have already been dismissed by the Supreme Court. In this regard, the decision rendered by the Supreme Court in the case of Vipin Kumar (supra) is worth mentioning here, the relevant paragraphs 4 & 5 of the same read as under :-

“4. There is no prohibition in filing a fresh bail application after the earlier was rejected or cancelled, if granted. This Court in cance