01Facts
The applicant sought regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in a case registered under Section 22(c) of the NDPS Act.
¶ 1The prosecution alleged that the applicant and two co-accused were apprehended with approximately 3,000 Nitrazepam tablets, weighing 1.68 kg, found in a plastic bag in a car.
¶ 1–4The applicant’s first bail application had been withdrawn with liberty to revive it after examination of seizure witnesses.
¶ 1–4In the second application, the applicant relied, among other things, on the examination of two witnesses who were declared hostile, the fact that the car belonged to a co-accused, and the absence of criminal antecedents.
¶ 1–4The State confirmed that the tablets were seized from the co-accused’s car and did not dispute the absence of antecedents.
¶ 1–402Issues
i.Whether the applicant should be released on regular bail under Section 483 BNSS in the circumstances of the case, including the seizure from a car owned by a co-accused and the absence of criminal antecedents.
¶ 3–603Law Applied
Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, provides the basis for the High Court’s consideration of an application for regular bail.
¶ 1The alleged offence was punishable under Section 22(c) of the NDPS Act.
¶ 1The order does not cite or discuss any precedent or set out a separate test under the NDPS Act; it records that bail was granted on consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case.
¶ 6Provisions in the judgment · 6 · Linked ones open on LawLens
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 483Section 84Section 351
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 Section 22
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 269Section 209
04Reasoning
The Court considered the parties’ submissions and the documents accompanying the application.
¶ 4–6It noted that the alleged tablets had been seized from a car owned by a co-accused, rather than from the applicant’s exclusive possession, and that the applicant had no criminal antecedents.
¶ 4–6On those circumstances, and without expressing any view on the merits, the Court found it appropriate to grant bail.
¶ 4–605Holding
The Court allowed the application and directed the applicant’s release on a ₹25,000 bond with one surety for the like amount, subject to the stated conditions concerning attendance, adjournments, and presence at specified trial stages.
¶ 7–8The order also set out consequences for specified defaults and directed that a certified copy be sent to the trial court.
¶ 7–8Original Court PDF
RAJ DASvsSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
