1 2025:CGHC:30568 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2947 of 2025 1 - Nimai Luha S/o Goutam Luha Aged About 28 Years R/o Village - Rakshaskumati, Thana - Manamunda, District - Boudh (Odisha) 2 - Purohit Sona S/o Vichitra Sona Aged About 20 Years R/o Village - Rakesh Kuri, Thana - Manamunda, District - Boudh (Odisha) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Officer, Police Station - Singhoda, District – Mahasmund (C.G.) ---- Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Vikash Pradhan, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Mr. Bharat Gulbani, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 04.07.2025 1. The applicants have preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as they have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 21/2025, registered at Police Station – Singhoda, District – Mahasmund (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 20(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, for short, the NDPS Act. 2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that a secret information was received by the Police of Police Station – Singhoda, District – Mahasmund (C.G.) RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 through the informant and on the basis of such information, the Police has seized a total of 5 Kgs. of Ganja from the possession of the present applicants. Thereafter, the applicants were arrested by the Police and the aforesaid offence has been registered. 3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants are innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. It is submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed in this case. It is also submitted that from the possession of the applicants intermediate quantity of the psychotropic substance ganja has been seized, and therefore, it will not attract the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act as the commercial quantity of ganja as prescribed under the schedule is more than 20 kgs and from the possession of the applicants only 5 Kgs of Ganja has been seized. The applicants are in jail since 27.02.2025 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, the learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case and the applicants are the resident of Orissa and there is no information about the criminal antecedents of the applicants from the State of Orissa. It is submitted that a total of 5 Kgs of Ganja has been recovered from the possession of the applicants, therefore, this bail application is liable to be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. After hearing the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties as well as considering the quantity of Ganja seized from the 3 possession of the applicants i.e. a total of 5 Kgs, which is less than the commercial quantity, further twice the time was granted to learned State counsel to inform this Court about the criminal antecedents of the applicants from the State of Orissa, but on such information about the same has been received till date. Also considering the fact that charge- sheet has been filed, and further that the applicants are in jail since 27.02.2025 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take sometime, I am of the opinion that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the applicants, Nimai Luha and Purohit Sona involved in Crime No. 21/2025, registered at Police Station – Singhoda, District – Mahasmund (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 20(B) of the NDPS Act, 1985, be released on bail on their furnishing a 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 sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him 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 4 initiate proceedings against him, 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 or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 8. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall make earnest endeavour to conclude the trial expeditiously, preferably within a period of six months from the date of passing of this order, if there is no legal impediment. 9. Office 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 Rajshekhar