1 / 4 2026:CGHC:23444 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4859 of 2026 Manish Ahuja S/o Ramesh Ahuja Aged About 35 Years R/o Near Sai Mandir Mahaveer Nagar P.S. New Rajendra Nagar, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through S H O, P S Kotwali, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Applicant : Mr. Anil Tripathi, Advocate For State : Mr. Anil S. Pandey, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge Order On Board 21/05/2026 1. Applicant has filed this bail application under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 133 of 2026 registered at Police Station –Kotwali, District- Raipur (C.G.) for offence punishable under Section 20 (C) and 29 of the NDPS Act. 2. Case of prosecution in brief is that on 21.03.2026 based on secret information, police of Police Station -Kotwali, Raipur had searched the Health Care and General Stores situated at near liquor shop at Nehru Digitally signed by PRAVEEN KUMAR SINHA Date: 2026.05.22 13:24:13 +0530 2 / 4 Nagar, upon which police found that Kyamuddin was indulged in selling the prohibited tablets/drugs at higher rates without prescription of doctor and seized 1100 Alprazolam Tablets measuring 132 grams. Co-accused Kayamuddin was arrested and based on his memorandum Dayal Das Udasi was also made accused. During course of investigation, applicant was also made accused in the crime and he was arrested on 22.03.2026. 3. Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the crime. There is no seizure of tablets from possession of applicant. Applicant is made accused only on the basis of memorandum statement of co -accused. He contended that except the memorandum statement recorded by police of applicant, there is no other connecting piece of evidence against him. There is no criminal antecedents against the applicant. Hence, applicant may be enlarged on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the submission made by learned counsel for the applicant and further submits that after recovery of seizure of prohibited tablets/drugs from possession of Kayamuddin, his memorandum statement was recorded upon which Dayal Das, co-accused, was arrested and on his memorandum statement, applicant is made accused. He contended that it is the applicant who places orders and receive prohibited tablets/drugs through courier and thereafter handover the same to co-accused Dayal Das Udasi and Dayal Das has kept those tablets in the shop of Kayamuddin. However upon putting query to learned counsel for the State as to any other document has been seized by police during course of investigation suggesting that applicant has called for drugs 3 / 4 through courier, he submits that in the charge sheet filed by investigating agency, no such material is available. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents enclosed along with bail application. 6. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for respective parties, facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation, period of pre- trial detention, applicant is stated to be the first offender, without commenting anything on merits of the case , I am inclined to allow the application. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on regular bail on his furnishing a personal bail bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court on the conditions that:-. “(a) 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. (b) 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 sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (c) 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 fail to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings 4 / 4 against them, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (d) 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 them 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 forthwith. Certified copy as per rules. Sd/-/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Praveen