1 2025:CGHC:56325 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9323 of 2025 Md. Aalam @ Kaju Khan S/o Late Nijamuddin Aged About 37 Years R/o Mominpura, P.S. Ambikapur District Sarguja C.G. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House O昀케cer (S.H.O.) P. S. Excise Department Divisional Flying Squad, Division Ambikapur, District Sarguja C.G. ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Anurag Tiwari, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 19.11.2025 1. This is the 昀椀rst bail application 昀椀led 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. 76/2025 registered at Police Station Excise Department Divisional Flying Squad, Division Ambikapur, District Sarguja (C.G.) for the o昀昀ence under Section 22(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief is that on 02.07.2025, the applicant, Md. Aalam @ Kaju Khan, was found in possession of 42 strips of Alprazolam 0.5 mg tablets, totalling 420 tablets and weighing about 58.8 grams, at Ambikapur. It is alleged that the applicant was in illegal possession of psychotropic substances without any valid authority or licence. Consequently, FIR No. 76/2025 under Section 22(c) of the NDPS Act was registered against him by the Excise Department, Divisional Flying Squad, Ambikapur, District Sarguja (C.G.). The applicant was arrested, and after completion of investigation, a charge-sheet was 昀椀led before the Court of the learned Special Judge (NDPS Act), Ambikapur, District Sarguja (C.G.), for the o昀昀ence under Section 22(c) of the NDPS Act. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated and has no involvement in the alleged o昀昀ence. It is argued that the quantity of Alprazolam allegedly seized is 58.8 grams, which falls under the intermediate category, whereas the commercial quantity noti昀椀ed under Entry No. 178 is 100 grams, however, the charge sheet has wrongly invoked Section 22(C) of the NDPS Act. It is further submitted that no contraband was actually recovered from the possession of the applicant, and the present case is a result of a premeditated conspiracy by certain Excise o昀케cials, particularly when an earlier FIR No. 288/2024 had been registered against the I.O., Ranjeet Gupta, in which the applicant had actively supported anti-corruption e昀昀orts. He further contends that the applicant su昀昀ers from a serious and life- 3 threatening neurological condition, Neurocysticercosis (NCC) as con昀椀rmed by the NCCT Head Report dated 08.09.2025, which shows multiple cystic lesions with active parasites, edema, and risk of seizures, and such condition cannot be adequately treated in jail. It is submitted that the prosecution relies only on CCTV footage and memorandum statements, and the documents including the Adherence Panchnama and consent notice contain overwriting and discrepancies in dates, rendering the alleged recovery doubtful. He further submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and he has been in jail since 02.07.2025 and 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, learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submit that the charge- sheet has been 昀椀led in the present case before the competent Court and also endorse the submission made by the learned counsel for the applicant. She further submits that from the possession of the present applicant 42 strips of Alprazolam 0.5 mg tablets, totalling 420 tablets and weighing about 58.8 grams was seized, therefore, the present applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 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 that in the present bail application the charge-sheet has been 昀椀led before the competent Court, the said contraband article which was 4 seized form the possession of the applicant is less than commercial quantity and the applicant has no criminal antecedents and he is in jail since 02.07.2025 and 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 – Md. Aalam @ Kaju Khan, involved in Crime No. 76/2025 registered at Police Station Excise Department Divisional Flying Squad, Division Ambikapur, District Sarguja (C.G.) for the o昀昀ence under Section 22(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall 昀椀le an undertaking to the e昀昀ect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 昀椀xed 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 昀椀xed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without su昀케cient cause, the trial court may proceed against him 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, 5 proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date 昀椀xed 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 applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates 昀椀xed 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 su昀케cient 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. O昀케ce is directed to send a certi昀椀ed copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan