1 2025:CGHC:60422 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8683 of 2025 Prakash Dhurve S/o Late Subhash Dhurve, Aged About 37 Years R/o Farid Nagar Bhilai, Tahsil And District Durg (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House OfÏcer Police Station Supela, District Durg (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Jitendra Gupta, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 11.12.2025 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. 1117/2025 registered at Police Station Supela, District Durg (C.G.) for the offence under Section 20(ख) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. 2. As per the prosecution story in brief, on 19.09.2025, the police of Police Station Supela received secret information that one person was selling contraband Ganja at the Slaughter House, R.K. Maidan, Supela. On the basis of the said information, a raid was conducted and a total of 1.204 ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.12.12 10:56:22 +0530 2 kg of contraband Ganja was recovered from the possession of the present applicant. Consequently, a crime was registered and the present applicant was arrested. 3. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that prosecution agency has not followed the provisions under Section 42 of the NDPS Act and not taken search warrant from the superior authority. He also submits that from the possession of the applicant intermediate quantity of Ganja was seized, and therefore, it will not attract the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act as the commercial quantity of Ganja as prescribed under the schedule is more than 20 Kgs and from the possession of the applicant 1.204 kgs of Ganja was seized. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has three criminal antecedents under the IPC, one case has already been compromised, and in the remaining two cases, the applicant has been granted bail. He also submits that the applicant is in jail since 19.09.2025, 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, 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. 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 that the contraband article i.e. 1.204 Kgs of Ganja was recovered from the possession of the applicant, which is less than commercial quantity, moreover, the present applicant has applicant has three criminal 3 antecedents under the IPC, one case has already been compromised, and in the remaining two cases, the applicant has been granted bail, 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 19.09.2025, 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. 7. Let the Applicant - Prakash Dhurve, involved in Crime No. 1117/2025 registered at Police Station Supela, District Durg (C.G.) for the offence under Section 20(ख) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, be released on bail on 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 sufÏcient 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 4 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 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. 8. OfÏce 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 Abhishek