1 2025:CGHC:42484 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5758 of 2025 • Mukesh Kumar Loniya S/o Ugrasen Loniya Aged About 32 Years R/o Village - Gudi, P.S. - Sipat, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus • State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Police Station - Koni, District - Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Applicant : Ms. Aakansha Dubey, Advocate For Respondent/State : Ms. Ankita Shukla, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 21/08/2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.272/2025 registered at Police Station Koni Thana, District - Bilaspur (C.G.) under Section 21 and 22 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 12.06.2025 at 11.05 O’clock that the police of Koni Thana on the basis of information of informer a raid was conducted near the petrol pump at Turkadih VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Date: 2025.08.22 18:43:52 +0530 2 Chowk a black colored motorcycle number CG 10-BL-1639 coming from Ghutku was stopped and questioned. The suspect consented to the inspector to search himself and the motorcycle in his possession. Thereafter, searching the suspect separately 27 strips of SPAS- TRASCEN-PLUS capsules, each strip containing 08 capsules, total 216 capsules, were found in a red coloured bad inside the clothes worn by Mukesh Kumar Lonia. 3. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case and the contraband artcle was not seized from the exclusive possession of the applicant. He further submits that that prosecution agency has not followed the provisions under Section 42 of the NDPS Act and not taken search warrant from the superior authority. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the contraband article which is said to have been seized from the possession of present applicant was above the commercial quantity, he is confined in jail since 12.06.2025. He also submits that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time, therefore, the applicant may be granted bail. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State/non- applicant would oppose the bail application and submit that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court. He further submits that from the possession of the applicant contraband article i.e. 27 strips of SPAS-TRASCEN-PLUS capsules, each strip containing 08 capsules, total 216 capsules, 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. 3 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case that the contraband article, 27 strips of SPAS-TRASCEN-PLUS capsules, each strip containing 08 capsules found from the possession of the applicant in intermediate quantity, also considering the fact that the charge-sheet has been filed, he has no previous criminal antecedent, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the Applicant – Mukesh Kumar Loniya, involved in Crime No. 272/2025 registered at Police Station Koni Thana, District - Bilaspur (C.G.) under Section 21 and 22 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 be released on bail on their 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 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. 4 (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. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 9. Office 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 vaishali