1 2026:CGHC:21404 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4247 of 2026 Vinay Singh Rajput S/o- Parkhat Singh Rajput Aged About 21 Years R/o- Mangal Bazar, Gudhiyari District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer, Police Station Khamtarai, District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Vikas Kumar Pandey, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Ritika Verma, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 07.05.2026 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. 415/2025 registered at Police Station Khamtarai, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence under Section 21(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. 2. As per the prosecution case, it is alleged that the applicant, along with the co-accused, was in possession of 41 bottles of Triprolidine Hydrochloride and Codeine Phosphate Syrup for the purpose of selling the said contraband item. ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2026.05.08 13:13:14 +0530 2 3. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicants that they have been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that the police have not filed any document along with the charge-sheet to establish or prove that the alleged contraband articles were seized from the conscious possession of the applicants. He further submits that a co- accused, namely Rakesh Pancheshwar, has already been enlarged on bail by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP (Crl.) No. 1230/2026 vide order dated 27.04.2026. Therefore, it is prayed that the applicants be granted regular bail on the ground of parity. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed in the present case. However, she could not dispute the fact that an identically situated co-accused has already been granted regular bail by Hon’ble the Supreme Court. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the fact that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court, and further considering that a similarly situated co-accused, namely Rakesh Pancheshwar, has already been enlarged on bail by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP (Crl.) No. 1230/2026 vide order dated 27.04.2026, this Court is of the considered opinion that the applicants are also entitled to the grant of regular bail in the present case on the ground of parity. 7. Let the Applicant - Vinay Singh Rajput, involved in Crime No. 415/2025 registered at Police Station Khamtarai, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence under Section 21(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic 3 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, (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