1 2025:CGHC:57048 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9518 of 2025 Lokesh Goyal S/o Late. Jasraj Goyal, Aged About 33 Years R/o Sadar South Road Dhamtari, P.S. City Kotwali Dhamtari, District Dhamtari (C.G.) ...Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station Kondagaon District Kondagaon (C.G.) ...Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Pravin Kumar Tulsyan, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Amit Verma, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 24.11.2025 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. 298/2025 registered at Police Station - Kondagaon District - Kondagaon (C.G.) for the offence under Section 20(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. 2. The prosecution story in brief is that on 07.09.2025, the police of VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2025.11.25 11:04:59 +0530 2 Police Station Kondagaon, District Kondagaon, received confidential information at about 07:00 that a white Baleno car bearing registration No. CG05/AT/3674, being driven at a high speed and in a manner endangering human life, had hit motorcycle riders Devnath Netam and Likhtaram Sodi from behind, resulting in an accident in which they died. It was further informed that four persons were travelling in the said Baleno car, which thereafter fell into a roadside drain and was damaged. They were allegedly carrying illegal Cannabis weighing 14.300 kgs in the rear trunk of the vehicle. The Police have arrested the accused on the basis of their memorandum statement made the applicant an accused and arrested him and there present after due investigation filed the charge-sheet. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that applicant has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. The prosecution has failed to comply with the mandatory provisions of law, and therefore, no case is made out against the present applicant. The prosecution has not proved the case beyond reasonable doubt and has further failed to establish compliance with Sections 41 to 58 of the NDPS Act, rendering the conviction bad in law. The applicant/accused was not apprehended at the scene of the incident. He is engaged in the business of renting passenger vehicles and, on 05.09.2025, had provided his Baleno car bearing registration No. CG 05 AT 3674 to co- accused Anurag Soni for travelling to Dantewada for a family function, after clearly instructing him that the vehicle be driven only by a licensed driver and not be used for any unlawful activity. The applicant had no knowledge whatsoever regarding the alleged material being 3 transported in the vehicle. The memorandum of the co-accused does not contain any incriminating statement against the applicant, yet he was arrested without any evidence. The applicant has been in jail since 07.09.2025 and is lodged with hardened criminals. The trial is not likely to conclude in the near future, causing undue hardship as the applicant would be required to face trial from jail. The applicant is the sole earning member of his family, and his entire family is dependent upon him. The applicant reserves his right to raise additional grounds during the course of arguments. The applicant is a permanent resident of the address mentioned in the cause title, where his movable and immovable properties are situated, and is ready to furnish adequate surety and abide by all conditions imposed by this Hon’ble Court, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 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. 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, it is noted that the applicant was not apprehended at the spot, and no contraband was recovered from his personal custody. The prosecution has not placed on record any material to prima facie demonstrate the applicant’s conscious possession of, or knowledge regarding, the alleged contraband said to have been transported in the vehicle owned by him. The memorandum statements of the co-accused also 4 do not contain any incriminating material against the applicant. It is further noted that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court and that the applicant has been in judicial custody since 07.09.2025, while the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some more time. In view of the above, this Court is of the considered view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in the present case. 7. Let the Applicant - Lokesh Goyal involved in Crime No. 298/2025 registered at Police Station - Kondagaon District - Kondagaon (C.G.) for the offence under Section 20(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two 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 she 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 her absence, without sufficient 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 her, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya 5 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. 8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaibhav