1 2025:CGHC:18856 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3172 of 2025 1. Tikendra Sahu @ Tillu S/o Laxmi Ram, Aged About 18 Years; 2. Jaiprakash Sahu S/o Laxmi Ram, Aged About 23 Years; Both are R/o Indira Nagar, Pacripara, Kurud, District Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicants versus  State of Chhattisgarh, Through Police Station Kurud, District Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent For Applicant :- Mr. Shobhit Koshta, Advocate. For State/Respondent :- Ms. Ankita Shukla, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 25/04/2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No.44/2025 registered at Police Station Kurud, District – Dhamtari (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Section 22(B) of the NDPS Act and Section 25 of the Arms Act. ANKIT KUMAR SINGH Digitally signed by ANKIT KUMAR SINGH Date: 2025.04.26 17:36:58 +0530 2 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 02/02/25, the police received the mukhbir information that three persons in Honda City Car bearing No.- CG 04/HA/6401 are illegally selling prohibited substance. On the receipt of information, the police searched the applicant and found from the possession of Tikendra Kumar Sahu @ Tillu 18 packet, total 144 piece Spsmo Proxy Von Plus and one old country made firearm 315 bor and five live Kartus and Rs 700 and one old Vivo mobile. That, from the possession of Jayprakash Sahu @ Golu 12 packet, total 96 piece Spsmo Proxy Von Plus and one knife and Rs 500/- and one old Vivo mobile. That, from the present applicant 6 packet, total 48 piece Spsmo Proxy Von Plus and one knife and Rs 220 and one old Vivo mobile. Afterwards, for the aforesaid act, the applicants were arrested in connection with Crime No.44/2025. 3. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants have been falsely implicated in this case and the contraband articles were not seized from the exclusive possession of the applicants. He further submits that the prosecution agency has not followed the provisions under Section 42 of the NDPS Act and not taken search warrant from the superior authority. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the applicants that applicant 3 No.1 has four criminal antecedents which are pending consideration however, applicant No.2 has no criminal antecedents. He further submits that the co-accused Gulshan Kumar Sahu has already granted bail by order of this Court dated 22.04.2025 in MCRC No.3056 of 2025. He further submits that the present applicants are in jail since 02.02.2025 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicants. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State/non-applicant opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court and also submits that applicant No.1 has four criminal antecedents and applicant No.2 has no criminal antecedent. He further submits that aforesaid material seized from the joint possession, therefore, the present applicants are not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and also the fact that there is four criminal antecedents against applicant No.1, the bail application of 4 the applicant No.1 Tikendra Sahu @ Tillu filed under Section 483 of the BNSS, involved in Crime No. 44/2024 registered at Police Station Kurud, District – Dhamtari (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Section 22(B) and Section 25 of the Arms Act, is rejected. 7. However considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that there is no criminal antecedent against applicant No.2 and further the considering the fact that the co-accused namely Gulshan Kumar Sahu who has also no criminal antecedent has already granted bail by order of this Court dated 22.04.2025 in MCRC No.3056 of 2025, moreover, the fact that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court in the present case and applicant No.2 is languishing in jail since 02.02.2025, and conclusion of the trial may take some more time. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 8. Let Applicant No.2 – Jaiprakash Sahu, involved in Crime No.44/2025 registered at Police Station Kurud, District – Dhamtari (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Section 22(B) of the NDPS Act and Section 25 of the Arms Act, be released on bail by furnishing personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court 5 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 initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. 6 (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. 9. Office 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 Ankit