1 2025:CGHC:55192 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9075 of 2025 Lukesh Sao S/o Laxman Kumar Sao Aged About 22 Years R/o Ward No. 11, Malda, P.S. Pusour, Distt. Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. ...Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, P.S. Baradwar, Distt. Sakti, Chhattisgarh. ...Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Praveen Sharma, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Amit Mishra, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 12.11.2025 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 applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 216/2025 registered at Police Station - Baradwar, District - Sakti (C.G.) for the offence under Section 20(B), 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 17.08.2025 Police VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2025.11.13 11:58:26 +0530 2 received the information from the informant 3 persons were waiting for selling the contraband article below the over bridge of Sakerli, acting upon the information received, the police party conducted raid and recovered 5.33 kg. of contraband article from the possession of the applicant and co-accused thereafter arrested the applicant and co- accused for the offence u/s 20-B, 29 of the N.D.P.S. Act. 3. That the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The main accused, namely Deepak Chandra, has already been granted regular bail by this Hon’ble Court vide order dated 30.10.2025 passed in M.Cr.C. No. 7602/2025 (Annexure A/3). The applicant has no criminal antecedents under the N.D.P.S. Act. The alleged contraband was not recovered from the exclusive possession of the applicant but from a public place, and the mandatory provisions of the N.D.P.S. Act were not duly complied with by the prosecution. The alleged quantity of Ganja is more than the small quantity but less than the commercial quantity. The applicant’s father is suffering from cancer, and being the sole caretaker, his continued custody is causing hardship to his family. The applicant has been in jail since 17.08.2025, the charge-sheet has already been filed, and the trial is likely to take considerable time for its conclusion. The applicant is a permanent resident of the address mentioned in the cause title, with no likelihood of absconding or tampering with prosecution witnesses, and is ready to furnish adequate surety and abide by all conditions that may be imposed by this Hon’ble Court, therefore, he prays for the grant of regular bail to the applicant. 3 4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State/non- applicant would opposes the bail application and submit that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court. 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, it is observed that the contraband article, i.e., Ganja, was recovered from the possession of the applicant, which is less than the commercial quantity. Also, considering the fact that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court, the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents, and one co-accused, namely Deepak Chandra, has already been granted regular bail by this Court in MCRC No. 7602 of 2025 vide order dated 30.10.2025, and further, that the applicant has been in jail since 17.08.2025 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some more time, this Court is of the considered view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the Applicant - Lukesh Sao, involved in Crime No. 216/2025 registered at Police Station - Baradwar, District - Sakti (C.G.) for the offence under Section 20(B) & 29 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 applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she 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 4 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 his counsel. In case of her 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 her, 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. 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