1 2025:CGHC:50652 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8057 of 2025 1 - Arunavati Goswami H/o Santosh Kumar Goswami Aged About 45 Years R/o Village Khanda Kadamtola (Kadampur) Street Ward No. 09, Post- Rampur, Thana- Anupur, District Anupur (M.P.) ... Applicant Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station- G.R.P., District Bilaspur C.G. ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Akath Kumar Yadav, Advocate For Non-applicant : Mr. Soumya Rai, Panel Lawyer SB : Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice ORDER ON BOARD 10.10.2025 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 has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 67/2025 registered at Police Station – GRP Bilaspur, District – Bilaspur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 20 (B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. 2. Case of the prosecution in brief is that, 09.08.205, the police got secret information by the informer, that one lady was present in Bilaspur Railway Station in Platform No. 7 & 8 and she is travelling SHUBHAM DEY Digitally signed by SHUBHAM DEY 2 with concealment of illegal narcotic drugs. Thereafter, police of Police Station – G.R.P. Bilaspur has seized 12 Kg of Cannabis from possession of the accused. Thereafter, G.R.P. police registered offence against the applicant punishable under Sections 20 (B) of the NDPS Act, 1985. 3. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case and the said contraband article i.e. 12 kgs of Cannabis was not seized from the exclusive possession of the applicant. He also submits that from the possession of the applicant 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 place of incident 12 kgs of Cannabis was seized. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and she is in jail since 09.08.2025 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the charge- sheet has already been submitted before the competent Court in the present case. However, she do not dispute the submission of counsel for the applicant that the applicant is having no criminal antecedent and further, she submits that she is a resident of Madhya Pradesh and there is no criminal antecedent against her either in State of Chhattisgarh or in the State of Madhya Pradesh. 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 contraband article i.e. 12 Kgs of Ganja was recovered from the possession of the present applicant, which is less than commercial quantity. Moreover, the present applicant has no criminal antecedents either in the State of Chhattisgarh or in the State of Madhya Pradesh. Also considering the fact that the charge- sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court and the applicant is in jail since 09.08.2024, conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the Applicant – Arunavati Goswami, involved in Crime No. 67/2025 registered at Police Station – G.R.P., District – Bilaspur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 20 (B) of the NDPS 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 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 4 his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against his 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 his, 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 sufficient 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. 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 certified copy of this order in accordance with law, if there is no legal impediment. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the Trial 5 Court concerned forthwith for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Dey