1 2026:CGHC:141 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8600 of 2025 Mahesh Uikey S/o Maniram Uikey Aged About 43 Years R/o Farid Nagar, Near Dera Basti Supela Bhilai P/S Supela District Durg (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through PS Supela District Durg (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Lukesh Kumar Mishra, Advocate appeared through Video Conferencing. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Nupur Trivedi, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 02.01.2026 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. 1093/2025 registered at Police Station Supela, District Durg (C.G.) for the offence under Section 20(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. 2. As per the prosecution story, the Investigating OfÏcer received a secret information, pursuant to which a raid was conducted, during which 1.340 kg of ganja was seized from the applicant. Thereafter, the applicant was arrested and produced before the concerned remand court, which ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2026.01.03 15:00:04 +0530 2 remanded him to judicial custody. 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 1.340 kgs of Ganja was seized. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has 02 criminal antecedents under the Excise Act which are pending trial. He also submits that the applicant is in jail since 16.09.2025, 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. 1.340 Kgs of Ganja was recovered from the possession of the applicant, which is less than commercial quantity, moreover, the present applicant has applicant has no criminal antecedents under the NDPS Act, 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 16.09.2025, conclusion of the trial 3 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 - Mahesh Uikey, involved in Crime No. 1093/2025 registered at Police Station Supela, District Durg (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 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 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, 4 (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