1 2025:CGHC:14873 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1628 of 2025 1 - Jagdish Singh S/o Mahender Singh Jaat Aged About 30 Years R/o New Danamandi Batala, P.S. Civil Line, District Gurdaspur Punjab. 2 - Sheetal Rajput, W/o Late Ravi Rajput Aged About 45 Years R/o New Danamandi Batala, P.S. Civil Line, District Gurdaspur Punjab. ... Applicants versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Excise Civil Line, Raipur, Dist. - Raipur Chhattisgarh. ... Non-applicant For Applicants : Mr. Akash Sahu, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Hariom Rai, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 27.03.2025 1. The applicants have preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) for grant of regular bail, as they have been arrested in connection with Crime No.23/2025, registered at Police Station- Civil Line Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 21(B) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act. 2. The prosecution story, in brief is that as per secret information KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 received from the informant, police authorities have acted upon the tip off, conducted raid and have seized 20.19 grams of heroine from the joint possession of the applicants. Thereafter, the aforesaid offence has been registered against the applicants. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submit that the present applicants are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the applicant were not found in the exclusive possession of contraband and the alleged offence are not made out against the applicant. He further submits that the quantity of contraband substance which was recovered from the joint possession of the applicants i.e. 20.19 grams of Herion, is less than commercial quantity as the commercial quantity of Herion is 250 grams and the applicants are languishing in jail since 23.01.2025 and in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court, the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, hence, he prays to enlarge the present applicants on bail. 4. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for grant of bail and submits that in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court, so far as the criminal antecedent of the applicants are concerned the applicant No. 1 has no criminal antecedent and the applicant No. 2 has one criminal antecedent but not under the NDPS Act and further the quantity of contraband article which has been recovered from the joint possession of the applicants, are less than commercial quantity. Hence, they are not entitled for grant of bail. 3 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the fact and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence levelled against the applicants and further the fact that in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court, so far as the criminal antecedent of the applicants are concerned the applicant No. 1 has no criminal antecedent and the applicant No. 2 has one criminal antecedent but not under the NDPS Act and further the quantity of contraband article which has been recovered from the joint possession of the applicants, are less than commercial quantity and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take sometime and the applicants are in jail since 23.01.2025, therefore, without further commenting anything on merits, I am inclined to grant bail to the applicants. 7. Let applicants, Jagdish Singh and Sheetal Rajput, involved in Crime No.23/2025, registered at Police Station- Civil Line Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 21(B) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond with two local sureties each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i)The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 4 accordance with law. (ii) The applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence proclamation under Section 84 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section Section 209 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicants 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 applicants are deliberated or without sufÏcient 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. OfÏce 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 Kunal