The main legal point established in the judgment is the consideration of criminal antecedent, quantity of contraband article seized, and filing of charge-sheet as factors for granting bail under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act.

Order on Board

22/03/2024

1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 34/2023 registered at Police Station Konta, District Sukuma (C.G.), offence under Section 20B (II)(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the police of Police Station Konta, District Sukuma (C.G.), received a secret information from the informant and on the said information police conducted a raid and seized 7.900 kgs of ganja from the possession of the present applicant. Thereafter, an FIR under Section 20B (II)(B) of the NDPS Act 1985, has been registered against present applicant.

3. It has been argued by Mr. Vikash A. Shrivastava, learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case and 7.900 kgs of ganja was not seized from the exclusive possession of the applicant. He further submits that that prosecution agency has not followed the provisions under Section 42 of the NDPS Act and not taken search warrant from the superior authority. He also submits that from the possession of the applicant intermediate quantity of the psychotropic substances contraband ganja has been seized, and therefore, it will not attract the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act as the commercial quantity of contraband article as prescribed under the schedule is than 20 kgs and from the possession of the applicant only 7.900 kgs has been seized. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has one criminal antecedent under the IPC of the year 2018 which is old and stale case and he is in jail since 23.10.2023 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, Mr. Malay Jain, learned Panel Lawyer, appearing for the State/non-applicant would oppose the bail application and submit that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court and also submits that the present applicant has one criminal antecedent under Section 307 of the IPC of the year 2018. He further submits that from the possession of the applicant contraband article i.e. 7.900 kgs of ganja is seized, therefore, the present applicant is not entitled for grant of bail.

5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary.

6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case that the applicant has one criminal antecedent under the IPC of he year 2018 which is an old and stale case and the contraband article i.e. 7.900 kgs of ganja which is less than commercial quantity and also considering the fact that in the present bail application charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.

7. Let the Applicant-Sujal Poddar @ Sujan Poddar involved in Crime No. 34/2023 registered at Police Station Konta, District Sukuma (C.G.), offence under Section 20B (II)(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond with Local two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:-

(i) 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.

(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 sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section

229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

(iii) In case,