1 2025:CGHC:29855 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR M.Cr.C No.5091 of 2025 Kamal Singh Bagari S/o Kalu Bagari Aged About 35 Years R/o Semlikala, Tehsil- Khilchipur, Police Station - Bhojpur, District- Rajgarh (M.P.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station - Dongripali, District- Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Shri Dhirendra Prasad Mishra, Advocate. For Non- Applicant/State : Shri Vivek Mishra and Shri HAPS Bhatia, PL. Hon'ble Shri Justice Deepak Kumar Tiwari Order on Board 02.07.2025 1. This is the 1st bail application filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the Applicant, who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.13/2022 registered at Police Station – Dongripali, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh, for the offence under Section 20(b) of the NDPS Act. Digitally signed by SISTLA NEELIMA VISHNU PRIYA Date: 2025.07.03 13:18:17 +0530 2 2. Prosecution case in brief is that the present Applicant, along with co-accused Raju Malviya, was transporting 100 kgs of ganja by Bolero pick-up vehicle in a hidden manner. Based on such information, the accused persons were apprehended. 3. Learned counsel for the Applicant submits that the Applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the crime in question for which, he is in jail since 21.03.2022. He further submits that the material witnesses have been examined and they have not supported the case of the prosecution and there are no previous criminal antecedents against the present Applicant. He further submits that co- accused Raju Malviya has been enlarged on bail by the Supreme Court vide order dated 01.05.2025 passed in SLP(Cr.) No.3501/2025 and as the case of the present Applicant is on similar footing, therefore, he may be released on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the Non-Applicant/State opposed the bail application. However, they submit that there are no previous criminal antecedents against the present Applicant as per the information available in the case diary. However, they do not dispute that the case of the present Applicant is similar to that of the co- accused, who has been released on bail. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, considering that the material and seizure witnesses have been examined before the trial Court and they have not supported the case of the prosecution and further considering that co-accused Raju Malviya has been extended the benefit of regular 3 bail, the Applicant is in custody for more than 3 years and his case is similar to that of the co-accused, also considering that there is no likelihood of the Applicants’ tampering with the prosecution evidence or absconding and conclusion of trial may take some time, the application is allowed. 6. It is directed that in the event of the Applicant’s executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs 2,00,000/- (Rs.2 lacs) with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court, they shall be released on bail on 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. (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. Sd/- (Deepak Kumar Tiwari) Judge Priya