1 2026:CGHC:24450 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5216 of 2026 Ishwar Dhritlahre S/o Late Girdhar Dhritlahre Aged About 50 Years R/o Village Parsada, In Front Of Stadium, Police Station Mandir Hasoud, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Mandir Hasoud, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. C.R. Sahu, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Ritika Verma, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 17.06.2026 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 applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 142/2026 registered at Police Station - Mandir Hasoud, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence under Section 21(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief is that the police of Police Station- Mandir Hasoud, District Raipur (C.G.), received a secret information from the informant and on the said information police RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 conducted a raid and seized contraband article i.e. Two Packet illegal intoxicate tablets Paracetamol Tramadol Hydrochloride Tablets I.P. PT-325 each Tablets Total 200 pieces, total pure weight 86 grams from the possession of the present applicant. Thereafter, offence punishable under Section 21(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 has been registered against present applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the said contraband article were not seized from the possession of the present applicant. He also submits that prosecution agency has not followed the provisions under Section 42 of the NDPS Act. He further submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedents, the charge-sheet has been submitted before the competent Court, and he is in jail since 18.03.2026 and 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 State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the charge- sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court and also endorse the submission made by the learned counsel for the applicant. She further submits that from the possession of the present applicant the contraband article i.e. Two Packet illegal intoxicate tablets Paracetamol Tramadol Hydrochloride Tablets I.P. PT-325 each Tablets total 200 pieces, total pure weight 86 grams were seized, therefore, the present applicant is not entitled for grant 3 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 though from the possession of the present applicant the contraband article i.e. Two Packet illegal intoxicate tablets Paracetamol Tramadol Hydrochloride Tablets I.P. PT-325 each Tablets total 200 pieces, total pure weight 86 grams were seized, but also considering the fact that the present applicant has no criminal antecedents and in the present bail application the charge- sheet has been filed before the competent Court and he is in jail since 18.03.2026 and conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the Applicant – Ishwar Dhritlahre, involved in Crime No. 142/2026 registered at Police Station - Mandir Hasoud, District Raipur (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 local 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 4 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 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. 8. Office 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 Rahul Dewangan