1 2025:CGHC:4054 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8420 of 2024 1 - Sandeep Singh Urf Sonu S/o Balvinder Singh, Aged About 32 Years R/o Village-Prowal, P.S.-Govindpal Saheb, District-Taran Taran (Punjab) At Present Residing - Gogaon Sundar Nagar, District-Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Sukhraj Singh Urf Sukhya S/o Karandeep Singh, Aged About 26 Years R/o Village-Prowal, P.S.-Govindpal Saheb, District-Taran Taran (Punjab) At Present Residing - Gogaon Sundar Nagar, District-Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Khamtrai, District-Raipur (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Ashish Gangwani, Advocate. For Non-Applicant(s) : Mr. Hariom Rai, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 22/01/2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 806/2024 registered at Police Station AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN 2 Khamtrai, District-Raipur (C.G.) under Section 21(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that as per secret information received from the informant the Police of Police Station Khamtrai, District-Raipur (C.G.) recovered 10 grams of Heroin/drug from applicant No.1 and 06 grams of Heroin/drug from applicant No.2, thereafter, the offence has been registered against the applicants. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in this case and the contraband article was not seized from the exclusive possession of the applicants. He further submits that 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 the quantity of contraband article recovered from the possession of the applicants is less than the commercial quantity. He later submits that the applicants have no criminal antecedent and he is in jail since 17.10.2024 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicants. 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 antecedent. He further submits that from the joint possession of the applicants contraband article i.e. 16 3 grams of Heroin/drug is seized, therefore, the present applicants are 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 and the fact that the applicants have no criminal antecedent and the contraband article i.e. 16 grams Heroin/drug recovered from the joint possession of the applicants is less than the commercial quantity, further charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court, this Court is of the view that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the Applicants - Sandeep Singh @ Sonu and Sukhraj Singh @ Sukhya, involved in Crime No. 806/2024 registered at Police Station Khamtrai, District-Raipur (C.G.) under Section 21(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, be released on bail on their furnishing personal bond with two local sureties each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicants 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 applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, 4 without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their 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 them, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicants 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 applicants are 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 them 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 date of receipt of this order in accordance with law, if there is no legal impediment. 9. OfÏce 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 Akhil