1 2025:CGHC:49831 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6420 of 2025 Rahul Baghel S/o Brahma Ram Baghel Aged About 22 Years R/o Ward No. 25, Subhash Nagar ,Tehsil and District – Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh --- Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Fhingeshwar, District – Gariyaband, Chhattisgarh --- Non-applicant MCRC No. 7105 of 2025 Prakash Kumar Dhruw @ Pappu S/o Lalaram Aged About 23 Years R/o Ward No.11 Nawapara, Daldali Road, Mahasamund, Police Station and District Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh. ---Applicant Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Fingeshwar, District : Gariyabandh, Chhattisgarh --- Non-applicant For Applicant (MCRC No. 6420/2025) :Mr. Virendra Kashyap, Advocate. For Applicant (MCRC No. 7105/2025) Mr. Bharat Lal Sahu, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State :Ms. Ankita Shukla, Panel Lawyer. PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2025.10.08 14:10:24 +0530 2 Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 07.10.2025 1. Since the above-mentioned two bail applications arise out of same crime number, they are clubbed and heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. 2. These are 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. 188/2025 registered at Police Station Fingeshwar, District Gariyaband (C.G.) for the offence under Section 20 (b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. 3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the police of Police Station Fingeshwar, District Gariyaband (C.G.), received secret information from an informant that the present applicants, along with another co-accused person, was transporting a total of 12.400 kilograms of ganja for the purpose of sale. During the ensuing raid, the said contraband was recovered from their possession. Thereafter, an offence punishable under Section 20(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, was registered against the present applicant. 4. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants have 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 3 from the superior authority. He also submits that from the joint possession of the present applicants and co-accused person, 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 applicants and another co-accused person, 12.400 Kgs of Ganja was seized. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants have no criminal antecedents and they are in jail since 26.06.2025 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. Therefore, she prayed for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 5. 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 antecedents. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case that the contraband article i.e. 12.400 Kgs of Ganja was recovered from the joint possession of the present applicants along with co-accused persons, which is less than commercial quantity. Moreover, the present applicants have no criminal antecedents. Also considering the fact that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court and the applicants are in jail since 26.06.2025, conclusion of the trial may take some time, 4 therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this case. 8. Accordingly, the bail applications are allowed. Let the Applicants - Rahul Baghel (in MCRC No. 6420/2025) and Prakash Kumar Dhruw @ Pappu (in MCRC No. 7105/2025), involved in Crime No. 188/2025 registered at Police Station Fingeshwar, District Gariyaband (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 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, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them 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 applicant fails to appear before the court on 5 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 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. 9. 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 Preeti