1 2025:CGHC:10934 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9041 of 2024 Ajay Mule (Wrongly Mentioned as Ajay Bhunde In Annexure A-1) S/o Shri Santosh Mule Aged About 22 Years R/o Selubazar, P.S. Magrurpir, District- Vasim Maharashtra (Detail of The Applicant Have Not Mentioned In Annexure A-1) --- Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer, Police Station Frejarpur (Parpa), District Bastar, C.G. --- Non-applicant Along with MCRC No. 56 of 2025 Om Datta Karane S/o Datta Karane Aged About 20 Years R/o Banoja P.S. Magalurpir, District Wasim Maharashtra --- Applicant Versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer, Police Station Frejarpur (Parpa), District Bastar (C.G.) --- Non-Applicant For Applicants : Mr. Vinod Kumar Tekam, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Monika Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 05.03.2025 1. These are the First bail applications filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for grant of regular bail RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 to the applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 124/2024 registered at Police Station – Frejarpur (Parpa), District- Bastar, (C.G.), for the offence punishable 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 Frejarpur (Parpa), District- Bastar, (C.G.), received a secret information from the informant and on the said information police conducted a raid and seized 17.170 kg of contraband Ganja from the joint possession of the present applicants. Thereafter, offence punishable under Section 20(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 has been registered against the present applicants. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the present applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that seized contraband Ganja was not seized from the joint possession of the present applicants. He also submits that prosecution agency has not followed the provisions under Section 42 of the NDPS Act. He further submits that both the applicants have no criminal antecedents and they are in jail since 14.07.2024 and 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 Panel Lawyer opposes the bail application of both the applicants and submit that the charge-sheet has already been filed in the both the cases before the competent 3 Court and also endorse the submission made by the learned counsel for the applicant. She further submits that from the joint possession of both the applicants total 17.170 kg of contraband Ganja was seized. She further submits that the applicant, namely, Ajay Mule, has 01 criminal antecedent under the IPC, therefore, the both the 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 applicant, namely, Ajay Mule, has 01 criminal antecedent under the IPC and applicant, namely, Om Datta Karane, has no previous criminal antecedent and also considering the fact that in the present bail application the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and they are in jail since 14.07.2024 and conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, this Court is of the view that both the applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the Applicants – Ajay Mule and Om Datta Karane, involved in Crime No. 124/2024 registered at Police Station – Frejarpur (Parpa), District- Bastar, (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 20(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, be released on bail on 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 4 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, 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 applicants fail 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 5 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 receipt of a certified copy 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 forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan