1 2025:CGHC:22370 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3406 of 2025 1 - Jagdish Prasad Verma S/o Lt Kishan Lal Verma Aged About 38 Years R/o Prithvipur, Shyawari, P.S. Mauw Ranipur, District Jhansi (U.P.) ... Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Bhatapara (Town), District Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Vijay Shankar Mishra, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Pramod Shrivastava, Dy. Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 27/05/2025 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 applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 40/2025 registered at Police Station Bhatapara, District Baloda–Bazar Bhatapara (C.G.) for the offence under Sections 20(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief is that the police of Police Station Bhatapara, District Baloda–Bazar Bhatapara (C.G.), received a secret RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Digitally signed by RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Date: 2025.05.28 16:25:12 +0530 2 information from the informant and on the said information conducted a raid and seized 18.860 Kgs of Ganja from possession of the present applicant, thereafter, the aforesaid offence was registered against the present applicant. 3. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that prosecution agency has not followed the provisions under Section 42 of the NDPS Act and not taken search warrant from the superior authority. He also submits that from the possession of the applicants intermediate quantity of Ganja was 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 18.860 Kgs of Ganja was seized. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and they are in jail since 13.01.2025 and 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, learned counsel appearing for the State/non-applicant would oppose the bail application and submit that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court and also endorse the said submission that the applicants have no criminal antecedents. He further submits that the applicant is resident of District Jhansi, (U.P.) and he is also involved in some of the activities under the Gambling Act. Further, from the possession of the applicant contraband article i.e. 18.860 Kgs of Ganja was seized, therefore, the present applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 3 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case that the contraband article i.e. 18.860 Kgs of Ganja was recovered from the possession of the applicant, which is less than commercial quantity. Moreover, the present applicants have no criminal antecedents. Also considering the fact that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court and the applicants are in jail since 13.01.2025, conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the Applicant – Jagdish Prasad Verma, involved in Crime No. 40/2025 registered at Police Station Bhatapara, District Baloda–Bazar Bhatapara (C.G.) for the offence under Sections 20(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, be released on bail on 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 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 accordance with law. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. 4 (iii) In case, the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. 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 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 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. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Ravi Mandavi