1 2025:CGHC:59726 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 10108 of 2025 T. Bajrang S/o T.S. Rao Aged About 22 Years Resident Of W.R.S. Colony, R.B.H. Raipur, Police Station Khamtarai, Tahsil And District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The Station House Officer Police Station Mahasamund, District – Mahasamund (C.G.) ---- Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Bharat Lal Sahu, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Saumya Rai, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 09.12.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) in connection with Crime No.349/2025, registered at Police Station – Mahasamund, District – Mahasamund (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Section 21(C), 22 and 27 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, for short, the NDPS Act and Section 25 of Arms Act. 2. The prosecution story in brief, is that the Police of Police Station – Mahasamund, District – Mahasamund (C.G.) has received a RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 secret information through the informant and on the basis of the said information, the Police authority has seized a total of 2600 MG of Codine Phosphate and 325 MG of Triprolidine HCI Syrup IP from the possession of the co-accused namely Praveen Sahu, and name of the applicant has come into light from the memorandum statement of the co-accused persons. Thereafter, the applicant was arrested and the case was registered by the Police. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated in offence in question. He further submits that no such seizure has been made from the possession of the applicants and the bail application of identically situated co-accused persons, namely, Shubham Sahu @ Chandramani Sahu, Kunal Fekar, Sonu Sahu, Amit Yadav and Janak Baghel have already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 20.11.2025 in MCRC No. 7542 of 2025 and order dated 03.12.2025 in MCRC No.9801/2025, whereas the bail application of co-accused Praveen Kumar Sahu, from whose possession the contraband article was seized, has been rejected by this Court vide order dated 20.11.2025 in MCRC No. 7803 of 2025. The applicant is in jail since 15.08.2025, the applicant has no criminal antecedent, charge-sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 3 4. Learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that a total of 2600 MG of Codine Phosphate and 325 MG of Triprolidine HCI Syrup IP from the possession of the co-accused namely Praveen Sahu, which is much above the commercial quantity. It is further submitted that the bail application of co- accused Praveen Kumar Sahu, from whose possession the contraband article was seized, has been rejected by this Court vide order dated 20.11.2025 in MCRC No. 7803 of 2025, and the name of the applicant has come into light from the memorandum statement of the co-accused. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed in this case. Hence, this bail application is liable to be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, period of detention of the applicant since 15.08.2025, but considering the fact that no such seizure has been made from the possession of the applicants and the bail application of identically situated co-accused persons, namely, Shubham Sahu @ Chandramani Sahu, Kunal Fekar, Sonu Sahu, Amit Yadav and Janak Baghel have already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 20.11.2025 in MCRC No. 7542 of 2025 and order dated 03.12.2025 in MCRC No.9801/2025, whereas the bail application of co-accused Praveen Kumar Sahu, from whose 4 possession the contraband article was seized, has been rejected by this Court vide order dated 20.11.2025 in MCRC No. 7803 of 2025, further the applicant has no criminal antecedent and charge-sheet has been filed, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the applicant, T. Bajrang involved in Crime No.349/2025, registered at Police Station – Mahasamund, District – Mahasamund (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Section 21(C), 22 and 27 of the NDPS Act, 1985, and Section 25 of the Arms Act, be released on bail on their 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. 8. Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rajshekhar