1 2025:CGHC:53435 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8676 of 2025 1 - Shekh Samad S/o Shri Shekh Masuk Aged About 48 Years R/o Mahadev Ward Shitlapara Kanker, P.S. Kanker, Distt North Bastar Kanker C.G. ... Applicant Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Kanker, Distt North Bastar Kanker C.G. ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Bhupendra Singh, Advocate For Non-applicant : Ms. Vaishali Mahilong, Panel Lawyer SB : Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice ORDER ON BOARD 31.10.2025 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 has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 262/2025 registered at Police Station – Kanker, District – North Baster Kanker (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 22 & 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. 2. The prosecution's story in brief is that, on 06.08.2025, the police authorities of Police Station – Kanker, District – North Baster Kanker, received a secret information from an informant and on the basis of the said information, police conducted a raid and seized 10 tablets of Kamadol and 15 tables of Becalm, 0.5 (Alprazolam) from the possession of the applicant. Thereafter the 2 aforesaid offences were registered against the applicant. 3. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He would further submit that the mandatory provisions with regard to search and seizure were not complied with in this case and the conclusion of the trial may take quite long time. He submits that from the possession of the applicant intermediate quantity of above-stated drugs were seized, and therefore, it will not attract the rigors of the NDPS Act as the commercial quantity of the said tablets as prescribed under the schedule is more than 100 tablets and from the place of incident only 53 tablets were seized. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and he is in jail since 06.08.2025 and the 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, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has already been submitted before the competent Court in the present case. However, she do not dispute the submission of counsel for the applicant that the applicant is having no criminal antecedent and further, she submits that from the applicant 15 tablets of the drugs have been seized and therefore, he may not be enlarged on bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case that the contraband article i.e. 15 tablets of Becalm, 0.5 (Alprazolam) was recovered from the possession of the present applicant, which is less than commercial quantity. Moreover, the present applicant has no criminal antecedents. Also considering the fact that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court and the applicant is in jail since 06.08.2025, 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. 3 7. Let the Applicant – Shekh Samad, involved in Crime No. 262/2025 registered at Police Station – Kanker, District – North Baster Kanker (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 22 & 29 of the NDPS Act, 1985., be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with local 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 sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against his 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 his, 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. 4 8. OfÏce is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the Trial Court concerned forthwith for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Dey SHUBHAM DEY Digitally signed by SHUBHAM DEY