1 2026:CGHC:22327 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4430 of 2026 Bhupendra Yadav S/o Lochan Yadav Aged About 24 Years R/o Potra, P.S. Lailunga, District- Raigarh (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer Raghunathpur Police Station- Lundra District- Sarguja (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. T.S. Sahu, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Ms. Monika Thakur, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 12/05/2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 39/2026 registered at Police Station KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 Raghunathpur Police Station- Lundra District- Sarguja (C.G.) under Section 20(B)(ii) B of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that as per secret information received from the informant, the Police of concerned Police Station seized 2 kgs of narcotic substance i.e. Ganja from the joint possession of applicant and co-accused, which led to the registration of alleged offence against the applicant and subsequently, the applicant was arrested. Hence, the bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case and the contraband Ganja was not seized from the exclusive possession of the applicant. He further submits that 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 joint possession of the applicant and co-accused intermediate quantity of the psychotropic substance ganja has been 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 joint possession of the applicant and co-accused only 2 kgs Ganja has been seized. He later submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedent and he is in jail since 26.02.2026 and identically situated co-accused, Khiro Yadav has already been 3 granted bail by this Court vide order dated 29.04.2026 in MCRC No.3910 of 2026, further the 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 and also endorse the said submission that the applicant has no criminal antecedent. She further submits that from the joint possession of the applicant and co-accused contraband article i.e. 2 kgs of Ganja is seized, therefore, the present applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 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 and the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedent and the contraband article i.e. 2 kgs Ganja recovered from the joint possession of applicant and co-accused is less than the commercial quantity, further considering the fact that co-accused, Khiro Yadav has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 29.04.2026 in MCRC No.3910 of 2026 and the case of present applicant is identical to that of the said co-accused, further the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case, this 4 Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the application is allowed. 8. Let the Applicant - Bhupendra Yadav, involved in Crime No. 39/2026 registered at Police Station Raghunathpur Police Station- Lundra District- Sarguja (C.G.) under Section 20(B)(ii) B of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, be released on bail on his 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 sufficient 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 5 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 sufficient 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. 9. Office 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 Kunal