1 2025:CGHC:39311 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6220 of 2025 M. Kamesh Rao S/o Late Krishna Rao Aged About 47 Years R/o Brp Chowk Durg, Mauhari Maroda, Police Station Newai District- Durg (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Officer, P.S. Newai - District- Durg (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Avinash Chand Sahu, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Bharat Gulbani, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 06.08.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 107/2025, registered at Police Station- Newai - District- Durg(C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 20(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, the ‘NDPS Act’). 2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that on 03.05.2025, the Police Station Newai received secret information that the present applicant was engaged in selling narcotic substance (ganja) near BSP Gate, RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 Mauhari Maroda Nursery, for illegal profit. Acting upon the said information, the police conducted a search and recovered 1.280 kg of ganja from a light yellow cloth bag kept in a vehicle. On the basis of the memorandum statement of the present applicant, he disclosed that he used to sell the aforesaid ganja in association with co-accused Prabhunath Singh and his wife Yashoda Singh. During the course of investigation, 3.452 kg of ganja was further recovered from the possession of co-accused Yashoda Singh, which had been illegally stored in a piece of cloth. Based on the aforesaid facts, the present applicant was arrested and the above-mentioned offence was registered against him. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that seized 3.452 kgs of contraband Ganja was not seized from the possession of the present applicant. He also submits that prosecution agency has not followed the provisions under Section 42 of the NDPS Act. He further submits that the present applicant has 29 criminal antecedents which are on or before the year 2010 and he is in jail since 03.05.2025 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 Panel Lawyer opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submit that the charge- sheet has already been filed in the present case before the competent Court and also endorse the submission made by the learned counsel for the applicant. He further submits that from the 3 possession of the present applicant total 3.452 kgs of contraband Ganja was seized and the applicant has 29 previous criminal antecedents which shows that the present applicant is a habitual offender, therefore, the present applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 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 present applicant has 29 previous criminal antecedents which are on of before the year 2010 and also considering the fact that in the present bail application the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and he is in jail since 03.05.2025 and 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 – M. Kamesh Rao, involved in Crime No. 107/2025, registered at Police Station- Newai - District- Durg(C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 20(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two 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 4 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 her 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. 8. 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 Rahul Dewangan