1 2025:CGHC:48339 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7580 of 2025 Mukesh Yadav S/o Arjun Lal Yadav, Aged About 27 Years R/o House No. 153, Budhwari Para, Ratanpur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Baramkela, District Sarangarh- Bilaigarh (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Ishwar Jaiswal, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 19.09.2025 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. 81/25 registered at Police Station Baramkela, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.) for the offence under Sections 20(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. 2. As per the prosecution story, in brief, on 11.07.2025, the police received information from an informant that certain unknown persons were transporting illegal contraband in their vehicle, a Maruti Suzuki XL6 bearing registration No. C.G. 10 BR 8991. Acting on the said information, ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.09.19 19:04:41 +0530 2 the police seized 4.230 kg of contraband ganja from the place of incident, prepared the seizure memo, and registered the offence against the applicant and other accused persons for the alleged offence punishable under Section 20(B) of the N.D.P.S. Act. 3. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has 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 applicant and other co- accused 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 joint possession of the applicant and other co-accused 4.230 kgs of Ganja was seized. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and he is in jail since 11.07.2025 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 applicant has no criminal antecedents. 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 and the fact that the contraband article, i.e., 4.230 kg of Ganja, allegedly 3 transported by the applicant and other co-accused persons, is less than the commercial quantity. Moreover, the present applicant has no criminal antecedents. Also considering the fact that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court and the applicant is in jail since 11.07.2025, 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 - Mukesh Yadav, involved in Crime No. 81/25 registered at Police Station Baramkela, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (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 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 his 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 4 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. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Abhishek