1 2025:CGHC:58605 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9801 of 2025 1. Amit Yadav S/o Ganesh Yadav Aged About 20 Years R/o Ward No. 23, Fafadih Raipur, P S Ganj, Tehsil and District Raipur (C.G.) 2. Janak Baghel S/o Mitthu Baghel Aged About 25 Years R/o Ward No. 6, Trimurti Nagar, Fafadih Raipur, P S Devendra Nagar, Tehsil and District Raipur (C.G.) … Applicants versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Mahasamund, District Mahasamund (C.G.) … Non-Applicant For Applicants : Mr. Shubhank Tiwari, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Amit Verma, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 03/12/2025 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 applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 349/2025 registered at Police Station Mahasamund, District Mahasamund (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 21(C), 22(C) and 27 of NDPS Act and Section 25 of Arms Act. 2. As per the prosecution case, Inspector Sharad Dubey, posted at Police PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2025.12.04 11:32:28 +0530 2 Station Mahasamund, received information from an informant that accused Praveen Sahu was in possession of contraband syrup at Daldali Sorid Road. Acting on this information, the police reached the spot and allegedly recovered 13 bottles (1300 ml) of Venerex Syrup containing Codeine Phosphate IP 2600 mg and Triprolidine HCI IP 325 mg, along with a knife, from the possession of accused Praveen Sahu. Accordingly, he was arrested and his memorandum statement was recorded, in which he stated that he had purchased the contraband syrup from co-accused Sushant Pradhan. Subsequently, co-accused Sushant Pradhan was also arrested. On the basis of WhatsApp calls and messages, the present applicants were also arrested in connection with the aforesaid offences. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated in offence in question. He further submits that the bail application of three of the identically situated co-accused persons, namely, Shubham Sahu @ Chandramani Sahu, Kunal Fekar and Sonu Sahu, have already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 20.11.2025 in MCRC No. 7542 of 2025, whereas the bail application of co-accused Praveen Kumar Sahu, from whose possession the contraband article was seized, has been rejected by this Court vide order dated 20.11.2025 in MCRC No. 7803 of 2025. The applicant is in jail since 15.08.2025, the applicant has no criminal antecedent, charge-sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the 3 case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, period of detention of the applicant since 15.08.2025, but considering the fact that identically situated co-accused persons, namely, Shubham Sahu @ Chandramani Sahu, Kunal Fekar and Sonu Sahu, have already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 20.11.2025 in MCRC No. 7542 of 2025, whereas the bail application of co-accused Praveen Kumar Sahu, from whose possession the contraband article was seized, has been rejected by this Court vide order dated 20.11.2025 in MCRC No. 7803 of 2025, further the applicant has no criminal antecedent and charge-sheet has been filed, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the application is allowed. 8. Let the Applicant Nos. 1 and 2 - Amit Yadav and Janak Baghel, involved in Crime No. 349/2025 registered at Police Station Mahasamund, District Mahasamund (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 21(C), 22(C) and 27 of NDPS Act and Section 25 of Arms Act, be released on bail on his furnishing a 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 his counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial 4 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 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 him, 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 for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Preeti