1 2025:CGHC:13359 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1715 of 2025 Kishan Kachhwaha S/o Shri Sanjay Kachhwaha Aged About 24 Years R/o Rathi Colony, Latkari Ke Padaw, Mahatma Gandhi Ward, Thana- Lordganj, District - Jabalpur (M.P.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House OfÏcer, Police Station - Tarbahar, District - Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Amit Singh Chauhan, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Amit Verma, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 20.03.2025 1. This is the second bail application filed under Section 483 of the BNSS for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 128/2024 registered at Police Station - Tarbahar, District - Bilaspur, (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 20(b) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act. 2. The earlier bail application of the applicant being MCRC No. 4578 of 2024 was rejected by this Court vide order dated 30.07.2024 on the ground that the applicant has 11 previous criminal antecedents. RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 3. Case of the prosecution, in brief is that the police of Police Station Tarbahar, District - Bilaspur, (C.G.), received a secret information from the informant and on the said information police conducted a raid and seized 2.200 kgs Ganja from the possession of the present applicant and 4.750 kg Ganja from the possession of the three other co-accused. Thereafter, offence punishable under Section 20(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 has been registered against the present applicant. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the first bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court on the ground that the present applicant has 11 previous criminal antecedents with a direction to conclude the trial within a period of 06 months but trial has not concluded and the applicant is languishing in jail since 10.04.2024 near about a year. He further submits that after framing of the charge, as per the status of the trial, none of the prosecution witnesses have been appeared in the case out of total 14 witnesses. He further submits that so far as the criminal antecedents of the applicant is concerned, the chart given in para (vi) in this bail application, out of 10 cases, the applicant has been acquitted in 02 cases which is of the year 2020, 01 case is disposed of and 07 cases are pending of the year 2009, 2020 and 2021, and there is no antecedent under the NDPS Act. He further submits that the other two co-accused person have been granted bail by this Court as they were not having criminal antecedent. He further submits that the contraband article which has been recovered is less than commercial quantity i.e. 2.200 Kg. Hence, 3 he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case that the first bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court on the ground that the present applicant has 11 previous criminal antecedents with a direction to conclude the trial within a period of 06 months but trial has not been concluded yet and the applicant is languishing in jail since 10.04.2024 near about a year and after framing of the charge, as per the status of the trial, none of the prosecution witnesses have been appeared in the case out of total 14 witnesses and further so far as the criminal antecedents of the applicant is concerned, the chart given in para (vi) in this bail application, out of 10 cases, the applicant has been acquitted in 02 cases which is of the year 2020, 01 case is disposed of and 07 cases are pending of the year 2009, 2020 and 2021, and there is no antecedent under the NDPS Act, and further the contraband article which has been recovered from the possession of the present applicant is less than commercial quantity i.e. 2.200 Kg, therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 8. 8. Let the Applicant – Kishan Kachhwaha, involved in Crime No. 128/2024 registered at Police Station - Tarbahar, District - Bilaspur, 4 (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 20(b) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond with two local 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 his under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against his, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (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 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate 5 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 his in accordance with law. 9. The Director General of Police, Bilaspur (C.G.) is directed to ensure that all the Police personnel who are prosecution witnesses in the charge-sheet shall appear before the trial Court on the next date fixed by the trial Court, failing which their salary should be stopped and the trial Court should submit its report. 10. Learned State counsel is also directed to communicate about passing of this order to the aforesaid authorities. 11. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall make an earnest endeavour to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible within a period of six months from the receipt of a certified copy of this order in accordance with law, if there is no legal impediment. 12. OfÏce is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan