1 2025:CGHC:60109 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8535 of 2025 Ayush Bansal S/o Shri Rajesh Kumar Bansal Aged About 26 Years R/o M I G- 2, 2630, Housing Board, P.S.- Jamul, Bhiali, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through District Magistrate- Durg, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh. ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Jaydeep Singh Yadav, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Amit Verma, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 10.12.2025 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. 460/2025 registered at Police Station Mohan Nagar, District- Durg (C.G.) for the offence under Sections 21(b) and 27(a) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief is that the Police of Police Station Mohan Nagar, Durg received information from an informant at about 09:40 a.m. on 10.09.2025 that six persons sitting in a Kiger car RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 bearing registration No. CG 07 CH 7776 at Dhamdha Road Sabji Mandi, P.S. Mohan Nagar, were selling contraband substance Heroin. Upon receipt of the said information, the police made an entry in the daily diary and, after completing the necessary formalities, proceeded to the spot along with the witnesses. On reaching the location, they found a red Kiger car (CG 07 CH 7776) and, after inquiring about the identity of its occupants, conducted their personal search, in which no objectionable article was found. Thereafter, on searching the vehicle, Heroin weighing 246 grams was recovered from a red trolley bag kept in the dickey/boot of the car. Consequently, the car, its keys, mobile phones and cash amounts were seized from the said persons namely Ujjwal @ Golu, Rahul Singh @ Shivaji, Monty Arora, Lokesh Kumar Ogre, Jattar Singh and Rajat Pandey and a property seizure memo was prepared. All of them were arrested and an FIR under Sections 21(b) and 27(a) of the NDPS Act, 1985 was registered. Subsequently, during the course of the investigation, the present applicant was also arrested by Police Station Mohan Nagar, Durg. Hence this bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the FIR, seizure memo and arrest memo clearly show that six persons were apprehended from the red Kiger car (CG-07-CH-7776) on 10.09.2025, and the applicant’s name does not appear at any stage of the initial proceedings. His arrest after 19 days, without any recovery or discovery from him, clearly shows 3 that he has been roped in later without any justification. It is further submitted that the only material relied upon by the prosecution is the alleged memorandum of co-accused Abdul Samir, which is wholly inadmissible in view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Tofan Singh v. State of Tamil Nadu (2021) 4 SCC 1, holding that such confessional statements to police ofÏcers cannot be used as substantive evidence. There is no material to show any presence, possession, nexus, call detail link, transaction or involvement of the applicant with the seized 246 grams of heroin, which is only an intermediate quantity. Hence, with no recovery from him and Section 37 NDPS not being attracted. He further submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and he has been in jail since 29.09.2025 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 not been filed in the present case before the competent Court. He further submits that from the joint possession of the present applicant and other co-accused persons Brown Sugar (Chitta) weighing approximately 246 grams, valued at about Rs.19,68,000/- were 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. 4 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case that though the charge-sheet has not been submitted yet but the fact that the applicant was not named in the FIR, seizure memo or arrest memo of the six accused persons apprehended at the spot, and that his arrest after 19 days is not supported by any recovery, discovery or material linking him to the seized contraband; further considering that the only allegation against him is based on the memorandum of co-accused Abdul Samir, which is inadmissible in view of the law laid down in Tofan Singh v. State of Tamil Nadu (2021) 4 SCC 1; and also taking into account that the recovered quantity of 246 grams of heroin is of intermediate category and the bar under Section 37 NDPS Act is not attracted, and there being no evidence of his presence, possession or nexus with the alleged offence, further the present applicant has no criminal antecedents and he is in jail since 29.09.2025 and conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the Applicant – Ayush Bansal, involved in Crime No. 460/2025 registered at Police Station Mohan Nagar, District- Durg (C.G.) for the offence under Sections 21(b) and 27(a) 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 fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in 5 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 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