1 2026:CGHC:21485 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3415 of 2026 Khomendra Sahu S/o Chhannu Lal Sahu Aged About 28 Years R/o Sanjay Nagar, Kurud, Police Station Kurud, District Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer, Police Station City Kotwali, Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. ... Non-applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Satyendra Mahadewa, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Sourabh Sahu, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri 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. 133/2026 registered at Police Station-City Kotwali, Rajnandgaon District - Rajnandgaon (C.G.) for the offence under Section 21(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 01.03.2026, Sub-Inspector Radheshyam Jurri of Police Station City Kotwali, Rajnandgaon KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 received secret information from an informant that four persons were standing beneath the Lakhouli under-bridge with the intention of illegally selling prohibited narcotic tablets/capsules for monetary gain. Acting upon the said information, the police party, along with independent witnesses, immediately proceeded to the spot and apprehended the suspects, who disclosed their names as Uttam Kumar Nagachi, Khomendra Sahu (present applicant), Roshan Rajput and one juvenile in conflict with law. Upon search, 30 tablets of Nitrosun-10 were recovered from the possession of the juvenile, 40 tablets of Nitrosun-10 were recovered from Uttam Kumar Nagachi, 48 capsules of Proxyvon Plus NRX were recovered from the possession of the present applicant Khomendra Sahu, and 32 capsules of Spasmo Proxyvon Plus NRX were recovered from Roshan Rajput. The accused persons failed to produce any valid licence, prescription or document authorising possession of the said narcotic substances. Consequently, the contraband articles were seized in accordance with law and the applicant along with the co- accused persons was arrested. Thereafter, a Dehati Nalishi was recorded on the spot and, upon return to the police station, Crime No. 133/2026 was registered at Police Station City Kotwali, Rajnandgaon for the offence punishable under Section 21(b) of the NDPS Act against the applicant and other co-accused persons. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case and has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. It is further submitted that the applicant has been made an accused merely on 3 the basis of suspicion and the alleged recovery from the possession of the applicant is only 48 capsules of Spasmo Proxyvon Plus, which falls within intermediate quantity, therefore, the stringent provisions contained under Section 37 of the NDPS Act are not attracted in the present case. He further submits that there is no independent witness to the alleged seizure and the entire prosecution case rests upon the testimony of police ofÏcials, which creates serious doubt regarding the prosecution story. It is also contended that the mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act, particularly Section 50, have not been duly complied with, thereby vitiating the alleged recovery. Learned counsel further submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedents, is a first-time offender and there is no likelihood of his repeating the alleged offence. It is further submitted that the applicant is in custody since 01.03.2026 and the charge-sheet has been filed, therefore, no further custodial interrogation is required. Lastly, it is submitted that there is no prima facie material available on record to establish conscious possession or intention to sell the alleged contraband, which are essential ingredients for constituting the offence under the NDPS Act. Further the applicant has no criminal antecedents and the trial is likely to take time, the applicant deserves to be released on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State/non- applicant opposes the bail application and submits that the charge- sheet has filed in the present case before the competent Court and the applicant has one previous criminal antecedent under the Preventive Action of the year 2023 and further the alleged quantity 4 of contraband article seized from the possession of the applicant, is intermediate quantity, but looking to the seriousness of this case, 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 that in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and further the quantity of contraband article which is said to have been recovered from the possession of the applicant, is an intermediate quantity and the applicant has only one previous criminal antecedent under Preventive Action and the applicant is in jail since 01.03.2026 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. 8. Let the Applicant – Khomendra Sahu, involved in Crime No. 133/2026 registered at Police Station-City Kotwali, Rajnandgaon District - Rajnandgaon (C.G.) for the offence under Section 21(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 5 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. 9. 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 Kunal