1 2025:CGHC:42469 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6083 of 2025 Arpit Mahilange @ Roshan S/o Gorelal Mahilange Aged About 28 Years R/o- Sakin- Jarhabhata Manjhwapara, Police Station- Civil Line, Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur, C.G. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station- Civil Line, Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur, C.G. ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Ms. Yogisha Singh Rajput, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Vaishali Mahilong, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 21.08.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 432/2025, registered at Police Station- Civil Line, Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 21, 22, 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, the ‘NDPS Act’). RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that on 18.04.2025, the police of Police Station Civil Line, Bilaspur, acting on information received from an informer, conducted a raid at the place of incident situated at Taramandal, near Railway Track, Bhartiya Nagar, Bilaspur, and seized 57 strips of Nitrazepam Tablets (10 tablets in each strip), totaling 570 tablets, from the possession of the accused. Each tablet contained 10 mg of Nitrazepam I.P., amounting to a total of 5700 mg. Thereafter, the police of Police Station Civil Line, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) arrested the accused person and registered an FIR vide Crime No. 432/2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 21, 22, and 29 of the NDPS Act. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. She further submits that the contraband article was not seized from the possession of the present applicant. She also submits that prosecution agency has not followed the provisions under Section 42 of the NDPS Act. She further submits that the present applicant has 07 criminal antecedents out of which, he has been acquitted in 04 cases and he has no criminal cases under the NDPS Act and he is in jail since 18.04.2025 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. Therefore, she prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned Panel Lawyer opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submit that the charge- sheet has already been filed in the present case before the 3 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 the said contraband article was seized and the applicant has 07 previous criminal antecedents which shows that the present applicant is a habitual offender, 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 the present applicant has 07 criminal antecedents out of which he has been acquitted in 04 cases and he has no criminal cases under the NDPS Act and also considering the fact that in the present bail application the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and he is in jail since 18.04.2025 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 – Arpit Mahilange @ Roshan, involved in Crime No. 432/2025, registered at Police Station- Civil Line, Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 21, 22, 29 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 file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 4 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 her absence, without sufÏcient 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. (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 sufÏcient 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. OfÏce is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan