1 2025:CGHC:4027 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 609 of 2025 Pradeep Pandey S/o Shatruhan Pandey Aged About 46 Years R/o Village Kumharouli, P.S. Jarhagon, District Mugeli, C.G. , Presently R/o Nigarband Road Takhatpur Naya Colony Takhatpur, District Bilaspur, C.G. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through The P.S. Sakri, District Bilaspur, C.G. ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. S.P. Sannat, Advocate along with Mr. Basant Kaiwartya, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 22.01.2025 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. 789/2024 registered at Police Station Sakri, District Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence under Section 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 Sakri, District Bilaspur (C.G.), received a secret information from RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN Date: 2025.01.23 16:48:55 +0530 2 the informant and on the said information police conducted a raid and seized total 16.820 Kgs of contraband Ganja from the joint possession of the present applicant and other co-accused. Thereafter, offence punishable under Section 20(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 has been registered against present applicant and other co-accused. 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 16.820 Kgs of Ganja was not seized from the joint possession of the present applicant and other co- accused. 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 one criminal antecedent in which he has been acquitted and he is in jail since 22.10.2024. He further submits that the other co-accused person, namely, Smt. Kanti @ Kajal Pandey, in MCRC No. 8035/2024 vide order dated 03.01.2025 has already been granted regular bail by this Court. Therefore, he submits that the present applicant is also entitled to be released on regular bail on the ground of parity. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel 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 pointed out that the present applicant has 01 criminal antecedent. She further submits that from the possession of the present applicant total 16.820 Kgs of Ganja was seized, therefore, the present applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 3 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 that the present applicant has only 01 criminal antecedent in which he has been acquitted and further the fact that co-accused person, namely, Smt. Kanti @ Kajal Pandey, in MCRC No. 8035/2024 vide order dated 03.01.2025 has already been granted regular bail by this Court and also considering the fact that the charge - sheet has already been submitted in the present case before the competent Court and he is in jail since 22.10.2024 and the conclusion of the trial may takes some more time, therefore, this Court is of the view that the present applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case on the ground of parity, 7. Let the Applicant – Pradeep Pandey, involved in Crime No. 789/2024 registered at Police Station Sakri, District Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence under Section 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 sufÏcient 4 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 sufÏcient 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. OfÏce is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan