1 2026:CGHC:9301 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 577 of 2026 Jami Raju S/o Rushidasu Jami Aged About 47 Years R/o Metturu Main Road, P.S.- Kutur Distt.- Shrikakulam Andhra Pradesh, Present Address - Village- Podiya, Gopisay Mohalla, P.S. Podiya, Distt.- Malkanagiri (Odisha) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through P.S.- Kanker, District- Uttar Bastar, Kanker (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Anmol Gupta, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Ritika Verma, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 23.02.2026 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. 357/2025 registered at Police Station- Kanker, District- Uttar Bastar, Kanker (C.G.) for the offence under Sections 21, 22 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief is that on 29.09.2025, information was received from a reliable informer that Dinesh Korram, RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 Rajkumar Sarkar and Gaurav Vishwakarma were allegedly in possession of illegal narcotic substances at Aparajika and were searching for customers to sell the same at New Bus Stand Bazaar Dom. Upon verification of the said information and after complying with the mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act, 202 tablets of NITROSUN-10, each weighing 10 mg (total 2020 mg, as mentioned on the wrapper), were seized from the possession of accused Dinesh Korram, Rajkumar Sarkar and juvenile Gaurav Vishwakarma, who is a juvenile in conflict with law. During investigation, accused Dinesh Korram, in his memorandum statement, stated that he had allegedly purchased the seized narcotic tablets and syrup from Jami Raju (present applicant), operator of Raju Medical Stores, Podia, Village Podia, Police Station Podia, District Malkangiri (Odisha), along with his associates Nimesh Mehra, Aftab Kallodi and Varun Netam. On the basis of the said memorandum statement, the present applicant has been arrested, and hence this bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case, as there is no independent or substantive evidence available against him and his implication is based solely on the memorandum statement of co-accused Dinesh Korram, which by itself is not admissible evidence. It is further submitted that no prohibited medicine, narcotic substance or syrup has been seized from the possession of the applicant, and no material has been collected to establish a prima facie case against him under the provisions of the 3 NDPS Act. He contends that though the prosecution has referred to certain online transfers in the account of the applicant, there is nothing on record to show that the said amount is in any manner connected with the alleged offence. He further submits that similarly situated co-accused person, namely, Dinesh Korram @ Danu has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 05.02.2026 in MCRC No. 10504/2025. He also submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedents, the charge-sheet has been submitted before the competent Court, and he is in jail since 13.10.2025 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant on the ground of parity. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submit that the charge- sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court and also endorse the submission made by the learned counsel for the applicant. She further submits that on the basis of credible information and after due compliance with the provisions of the NDPS Act, 202 NITROSUN-10 tablets were seized from the possession of the co-accused persons, and during investigation accused Dinesh Korram, in his memorandum statement, specifically named the present applicant as the source from whom the contraband tablets and syrup were procured. It is submitted that considering the seriousness and gravity of the offence under the NDPS Act and the material collected during investigation, the present applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 4 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 though the contraband article i.e. 6202 NITROSUN-10 tablets were seized from the possession of the co-accused persons, and during investigation accused Dinesh Korram, in his memorandum statement, specifically named the present applicant as the source from whom the contraband tablets and syrup were procured, but the said contraband article is less than commercial quantity and further the fact that co-accused person, namely, Dinesh Korram @ Danu has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 05.02.2026 in MCRC No. 10504/2025, and the applicant has no criminal antecedents and he is in jail since 13.10.2025 and 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. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the Applicant – Jami Raju, involved in Crime No. 357/2025 registered at Police Station- Kanker, District- Uttar Bastar, Kanker (C.G.) for the offence under Sections 21, 22 and 29 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 he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 5 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, (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 forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan