1 2025:CGHC:55431 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8156 of 2025 1 - Smt. Malti Bai W/o Shaileks Aged About 23 Years R/o Railway Station Balangir P.S. Balangir District Orisha 2 - Sunita Bai W/o Nitesh Solanki Aged About 40 Years R/o Railway Station Balangir P.S. Balangir District Orisha ... Applicants versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Singhoda, District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant For Applicants : Mr. Sudhanshu Kumar Singh, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Ankita Shukla, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 13.11.2025 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 applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 36/2025 registered at Police Station – Singhoda District – Mahasamund (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 20(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2025.11.14 11:31:52 +0530 2 2. The prosecution story that on dated 15/04/2025 police official were patrolling about contraband(Ganja) in vehicle no. CG04PC2687 to raid IIllegal Contraband and received secret information at about 7:30 Pm that 5 person having the Ganja and waiting for the bus at NH No.53 Village Ganayari Pali Chowk and after informed to the SDOP saraypali the police official has reached to the Ganayari Pali Chowk and as per the information Four Female and One male person having Three bags were waiting for the bus and after seeing the Police officials they tried to run away but police Official have caught all of them and asked from them that why were they running away than all the person have accepted that they are having Ganja in there bag and they were carrying the Ganja from orrisa and it has to be sell in Raipur (C.G.) and upon asking there name they stated their name as 1 sonam bai Solanki W/O Jitendra Solanki, 2 Malti Solanaki W/o Rolex Solanki, 3 Sunita Solanki W/o Nilesh Solanki, 4. Deepali Pawar W/o Litti Pawar and Gurjar Pawar S/o Suklal Pawar and during the Checking 21 Packets(Total 21 Kg) Contrbend III-legal Ganja seized from all of them and there after police has register offence under them. 3. The applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the alleged contraband has not been seized from the exclusive possession of the applicants; rather, the alleged Ganja was seized from Village Ganyari Pali Chowk. The applicants submit that on the date of the incident, they had come to visit their relatives and, after visiting, were returning to their home. While waiting for the bus at the bus stand, they were apprehended by the police officials without any justifiable reason. The applicants were travelling from Barpali to Raipur for manihari (petty trading) work when 3 the police officials of Singhoda Police Station stopped the bus, interrogated them about their residence, and began abusing them on the pretext that they belonged to another state. Thereafter, on mere suspicion, the applicants were arrested, although no contraband was recovered from their possession. It is further submitted that Applicant No. 1 is a woman having a child aged about one and a half years, who is presently in jail with her mother since 15.04.2025, and the said child is also suffering from various ailments. The applicants are poor labourers who had come to Saraypali only to visit their relatives, and without any credible evidence or recovery, they have been falsely implicated in the present offence. The charge sheet has already been filed before the competent Court, and the applicants are in judicial custody since 15.04.2025, it is humbly prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant bail to the applicants 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that in the present case, charge- sheet has not yet been submitted before the competent Court. It is further submitted that a huge quantity of contraband article i.e., 21 kgs. of ganja, was recovered from the applicants. This quantity far exceeds the commercial quantity prescribed under the NDPS Act. She also submits that the applicants have failed to provide any satisfactory explanation regarding the alleged contraband article i.e., 21 kgs. of ganja seized from the alleged vehicle. In view of the seriousness of the offence and the quantity involved, it is submitted that the applicants are not entitled to be released on bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the 4 case diary. 6. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case and upon perusal of the case diary, it is revealed that the contraband article, i.e., 21.00 kg of ganja, which is more than the commercial quantity, has been seized from the bags of the accused persons, and no satisfactory explanation has been provided by them in this regard, further the recovery of such a substantial quantity prima facie indicates the involvement of the present applicants in the illicit trafficking of narcotic substances, which constitutes a serious offence under the NDPS Act. However, it is also noted that applicant No. 1, Malti Bai, is a woman aged about 23 years and has a child aged about one and a half years, taking into account the age and personal circumstances of applicant No. 1, and considering that continued detention of a woman without an infant child would cause undue hardship to both, this Court is of the considered view that applicant No. 1 deserves the benefit of bail on humanitarian grounds. Accordingly, the bail application in respect of applicant No. 1 is allowed, whereas the bail application in respect of applicant No. 2, Sunita Bai, is rejected. 7. Let the Applicant No.1 - Smt. Malti Bai, involved in Crime No. 36/2025 registered at Police Station – Singhoda District – Mahasamund (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 local sureties 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 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 5 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 sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicants 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 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 them 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 vaibhav