1 2026:CGHC:23826 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2492 of 2026 1. Sahil Kumar Gupta S/o Akshay Lal Aged About 25 Years R/o Village Gagi Cowk, P.S. Aranagar, Dist. Bhojpur Bihar, Present Adress Sale Tax Colony, Bhawna Nagar, Raipur (C.G.) 2. Vimal Kushwaha S/o Chhote Lal, Aged About 20 Years R/o Durgapuri, Ragar, P.S. Maudha, Dist. Hamirpur U.P. Present Address Sale Tax Colny, Bhawna Nagar, P.S. Khamardih Raipur C.G. ... Applicants versus State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer P.S. Khamardih Dist. Raipur (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicants : Mr. Virendra Kashyap, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Sameeksha Gupta, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 15.06.2026 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 applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 402/2025 registered at Police Station Khamardih, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence under Sections 20(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2026.06.16 15:01:19 +0530 2 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that upon receiving information from the informer, the respondent police, on 23.12.2025, conducted a search and seizure and allegedly recovered 4.200 kg of ganja from applicant No. 1 and 3.300 kg of ganja from applicant No. 2. Thereafter, the applicants were taken into custody and offences under the aforesaid sections were registered against them. 3. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicants that they have been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the prosecution agency failed to comply with the provisions of Section 42 of the NDPS Act and did not obtain a search warrant from the competent superior authority. It is also submitted that only an intermediate quantity of Ganja was allegedly recovered from the possession of the applicants; therefore, the rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act are not attracted. Learned counsel points out that the commercial quantity of Ganja prescribed under the Schedule is more than 20 kilograms, whereas only 4.200 kilograms were allegedly seized from the possession of Applicant No. 1 and 3.300 kilograms from the possession of Applicant No. 2. It is further submitted that the applicants have no criminal antecedents under the NDPS Act and have been in judicial custody since 23.12.2025. The conclusion of the trial is likely to take a considerable period of time. Therefore, learned counsel prays for the grant of regular bail to the applicants. 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 applicants have no criminal antecedents under the NDPS Act. 3 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, particularly that 4.200 kilograms and 3.300 kilograms of Ganja were recovered from the possession of the applicants, which is less than the commercial quantity prescribed under the NDPS Act, and further considering that the applicants have no criminal antecedents under the NDPS Act, this Court finds it appropriate to extend the benefit of bail to them. Further, considering the fact that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court and the applicants have been in judicial custody since 23.12.2025, and that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, this Court is of the view that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail in the present case. 7. Let the Applicants - Sahil Kumar Gupta and Vimal Kushwaha, involved in Crime No. 402/2025 registered at Police Station Khamardih, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence under Sections 20(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two local sureties each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, 4 the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicants 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 applicants are 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. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Abhishek