1 2026:CGHC:24672 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4829 of 2026 Ravi Tamer S/o Krishna Tamer Aged About 26 Years R/o Neem Dabri Raipur Convent Shrinagar, Police Station - Khamtarai, District – Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station - Khamtarai District – Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Ali Afzaal Mirza, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Monika Thakur, Panel Lawyer. H on’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 18.06.2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagrik 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 punishable under Section 21(C) of NDPS Act. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 07.05.2025, the police received secret information from an informant that three young men, aged between 25 and 30 years, were transporting a large quantity of prohibited intoxicating syrup on a motorcycle bearing Registration No. CG-04- LG-6169 and a white Activa bearing Registration No. CG-04-NB-5699 from Shrinagar Khamtarai towards Bhanpuri. The information was duly PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2026.06.19 16:35:16 +0530 2 recorded in the Rojnamcha, following which a police team, along with independent witnesses, proceeded to conduct a checking operation. During the checking, three persons matching the description provided by the informant were intercepted while travelling on the aforesaid vehicles. Upon inquiry, they disclosed their identities as Ravi Tamer (the present applicant), Rakesh Pancheshwar, and Vinay Singh Rajput. A search of their possession led to the recovery of 120 bottles of prohibited intoxicating syrup. The seizure was effected in accordance with law. From the possession of the present applicant, Ravi Tamer, 39 bottles (3,900 ml) of intoxicating syrup valued at Rs. 4,914/- were recovered. From co-accused Rakesh Pancheshwar, 40 bottles (4,000 ml) valued at Rs. 5,040/- along with the motorcycle bearing Registration No. CG-04- LG-6169 were seized. From co-accused Vinay Singh Rajput, 41 bottles (4,100 ml) valued at Rs. 5,166/- and the Activa bearing Registration No. CG-04-NB-5699, valued at Rs. 20,000/-, were recovered. The total value of the seized articles was assessed at Rs. 60,120/-. Thereafter, Crime No. 415/2025 was registered against the accused persons for the offence punishable under Section 21(c) of the NDPS Act. Upon completion of the investigation, Charge-sheet No. 730/2025 dated 02.08.2025 was filed before the competent Court. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. It is argued that identically situated co-accused persons, namely, Rakesh Pancheshwar and Narbad Katre have already been granted bail by the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide order dated 27.04.2026 and 04.05.2026 in SLP (Crl.) Nos. 1230/2026 and 8280/2026. Further, identically situated another co-accused person, namely, Vinay Singh Rajput has been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 07.05.2026 passed in MCRC No. 4247/2026. It is further 3 submitted that the applicant has one previous criminal antecedents, which has been disposed of, further the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case, and the applicant has been in jail since 07.05.2025. As the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time, the applicant seeks regular bail on the ground of parity. 4. Learned counsel for the State/non-applicant opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case but could not dispute the fact that identically situated other co-accused persons have already been granted bail by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and by this Court. 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, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and the fact that the c identically situated co-accused persons, namely, Rakesh Pancheshwar and Narbad Katre have already been granted bail by the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide order dated 27.04.2026 and 04.05.2026 in SLP (Crl.) Nos. 1230/2026 and 8280/2026, further, identically situated another co-accused person, namely, Vinay Singh Rajput has been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 07.05.2026 passed in MCRC No. 4247/2026, the applicant has one previous criminal antecedents, which has been disposed of, further the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case, and the applicant has been in jail since 07.05.2025, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case on the ground of parity. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant - Ravi Tamer, involved in Crime No. 415/2025 registered at Police Station 4 – Khamtarai, District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 21(C) of NDPS Act, be released on bail on his furnishing a 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 she 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 her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of BNS. (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 BNS. (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 5 sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against her in accordance with law. 8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Preeti