1 2025:CGHC:61535 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9421 of 2025 Satish Kumar Ambuvani S/o Raj Kumar Ambuwani Aged About 38 Years (Age Is Not Mention In Bail Rejection Order) R/o Purani Hatari Bazar, Raigarh House No. 81/1, Beladula Sindhi Colony Raigarh, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Inspector, Food And Durg Administration, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Mateen Siddiqui, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Ms. Vaishali Mahilong, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 17/12/2025 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. __/2025 (as per bail rejection order AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN 2 and bail application filed by the applicant) registered at Inspector, Food And Durg Administration, District : Raigarh (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 17 B (b) & (e), 18(A), 18(C), 27(C), 28, 27(b)(ii) of Drugs & Cosmetic Act. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 21.07.2025, on the instructions of the Assistant Drug Controller, an employee of the Food & Drug Administration, Damrudhar Mishra, visited the applicant’s shop as a decoy customer and purchased Panderm++ Cream by paying ₹200/-. The cream was sold by the applicant’s father, Raj Kumar Ambuvani, without producing any purchase documents. Thereafter, the FDA team raided the shop, recovered the ₹200/- note from the counter, seized the cream, and sent its sample for forensic examination. As per the report dated 03.10.2025 of the Government Forensic Examination Laboratory, Raipur, the seized cream was found to be fake. Since the applicant is the proprietor of the shop, offences under Sections 17B(b) & (e), 18(A), 18(C), 27(c), 27(b)(ii) and 28 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 were registered, and the applicant was arrested and produced for judicial remand under Section 187 BNSS. Hence, the bail application. 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 co-accused, namely, Rajkumar Ambuvani has already been granted anticipatory bail by 3 this Court vide order dated 05.12.2025 in MCRCA No.1885 of 2025. The applicant is in jail since 06.11.2025, 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. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. She further submits that the applicant, being the proprietor of the shop, is alleged to have sold and stored fake Panderm++ Cream through her shop without valid purchase documents, in violation of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940, and to have been responsible for the illegal sale of spurious drugs found during the Food & Drug Administration raid. Therefore, the 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, nature and gravity of offence, period of detention of the applicant since 06.11.2025, the fact that though the applicant, being the proprietor of the shop, is alleged to have sold and stored fake Panderm++ Cream through her shop without valid purchase documents, in violation of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940, and to have been responsible for the illegal sale of spurious drugs found during the Food & Drug Administration raid, but considering 4 the fact that co-accused, namely, Rajkumar Ambuvani has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 05.12.2025 in MCRCA No.1885 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. Accordingly, the application is allowed. 8. 7. Accordingly, the application is allowed. 8. Let the Applicant-Satish Kumar Ambuvani, involved in Crime No. __/2025 (as per bail rejection order and bail application filed by the applicant) registered at Inspector, Food And Durg Administration, District : Raigarh (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 17 B (b) & (e), 18(A), 18(C), 27(C), 28, 27(b)(ii) of Drugs & Cosmetic 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 5 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 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. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Akhil