1 2025:CGHC:20513 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3461 of 2025 Rakesh Kumar Penika S/o Bhagirath Aged About 29 Years R/o Village Rinu Tahsil Laxmangarh Police Station Belara District Seekar Rajasthan ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Baramkela, District- Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Awadh Tripathi, Advocate For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. U.K.S. Chandel, Dy. Adv. General. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 05/05/2025 1. This is the second 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. 134/2024 registered at Police Station- Baramkela, District- Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 20(B) of NDPS Act. 2. The earlier bail application of the applicant being MCRC No. 7755/2025, vide order dated 08.11.2024 was rejected on merits. Hence, this bail application. KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 27/07/2024, Police Station Baramkela received an information from the informant and on the basis of such information, searched one ECO Sports vehicle bearing registration No. RJ-14-CY-5881 and caught the applicant and two others who were present on the aforesaid vehicle and searched the vehicle and alleged to be found 50 kgs of contraband article in 30 packets. Upon such basis the said contraband article was recovered from the join possession of the accused persons and thereafter, registered the FIR against the applicant and two others. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case and prima-facie no evidence is made out against the applicant and the other co-accused persons have also been released on bail. He further submits that the earlier bail application of the applicant was rejected on merits and the new ground which has been raised that the relevant witnesses and the seizure witnesses who have been examined before the learned special judge have turned completely hostile and have not supported the case of the prosecution. He further submits that the Hon'ble Apex Court in the S.L.P. (Criminal) No. 3125/2025 arising out of same crime no. 134/2024 in which the Hon'ble Apex Court has allowed the bail of the co-accused Omprakash Repswal on the ground that the evidence of the three prosecution witnesses have turned hostile. Hence, the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail on the same ground in which the co- accused has been granted bail and a copy of the order dated 07/04/2025 by the Hon'ble Apex Court has been filed and marked 3 herewith as ANNEXURE A/4 and this Hon'ble Court has been kind enough to allow the application for other co-accused Phoolchand in MCRC No. 3276/2025 and the applicant is in jail since 27.07.2024 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel, appearing for the State/non-applicant opposes the the prayer for grant of bail and submits that the earlier bail application of the applicant was rejected on merits. Therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Taking into consideration the fact and circumstances of the case that the earlier bail application of the applicant being MCRC No. 7755/2025, vide order dated 08.11.2024 was rejected on merits and new ground which has been raised that the relevant witnesses, including the seizure witnesses who have been examined before the learned Special Judge, have turned completely hostile and have not supported the prosecution's case, further after the rejection of the bail application of the co-accused, namely Omprakash Repswal, in MCRC No. 9067 of 2024, vide order dated 02.01.2025, the said co-accused preferred a Special Leave Petition (S.L.P.) before the Hon'ble Apex Court, the Apex Court allowed the S.L.P., directed him to surrender before the concerned Court and ordered that he be enlarged on bail and also considering the fact that the co- accused namely Phulchand Rawat, has already been granted bail by this Court in MCRC No. 3276/2025, vide order dated 29.04.2025 and the case of the applicant is similar to that of the co-accused, thus without further commenting anything on merits, I am inclined to 4 grant bail to the applicant. 8. Let the applicant – Rakesh Kumar Penika, involved in Crime No. 134/2024 registered at Police Station- Baramkela, District- Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 20(B) of NDPS Act. be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two 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 his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient 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, 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. 5 (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. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance. dorthwith. - S/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal