1 2026:CGHC:25437 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5437 of 2026 Lalit Yadav S/o Supadi Lal Yadav Aged About 25 Years R/o Village Baroudhi Police Station – Bhatgaon, District – Surajpur, C.G. … Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Officer Police Of Out Post Latori Police Station – Jainagar, District - Surajpur C.G. ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr Anil Kumar Gulati, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Vaishali Mahilong, Deputy Government Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 22.06.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as she has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 81/2026, registered at Out Post – Latori, Police Station – Jainagar, District - Surajpur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 20(B) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, for short, the NDPS Act. 2. As per the brief facts of the prosecution case, on 06.03.2026, the police were conducting vehicle checking near Village Latori. During the course of checking, a vehicle coming from Ambikapur was noticed by the police. It is alleged that upon noticing the police checking, the vehicle was stopped approximately 50 meters before the checking point, and the driver PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2026.06.22 19:09:35 +0530 2 attempted to turn the vehicle around. Finding the conduct of the occupants suspicious, the police chased and intercepted the vehicle. It is further alleged that three persons were found travelling in the said vehicle. The person driving the vehicle was the present applicant, while the other two occupants were identified as Jeevdhan Paikara and Surendra Kumar Lashkar. After completing the necessary search and seizure formalities, the police allegedly recovered a total quantity of 8 kg and 990 grams of contraband Ganja. As per the seizure memo, 4 kg and 540 grams of Ganja was recovered from the possession of Surendra Kumar Lashkar and 4 kg and 450 grams of Ganja was recovered from the possession of Jeevdhan Paikara. No contraband was recovered or seized from the possession of the present applicant. Thereafter, the applicant was arrested in connection with the commission of the alleged offence. 3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that nothing has been seized from the possession of the applicant. The applicant was merely the driver of the vehicle and was driving it at the relevant point of time. As per the seizure memo, no contraband article was recovered from the possession of the applicant. It is further submitted that a co-accused, who was involved in the present case, has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 18.06.2026 passed in MCRC No. 5300/2026. It is also submitted that the charge-sheet has already been filed, there is no previous criminal antecedent against the applicant, and he has been in judicial custody since 06.03.2026. The conclusion of the trial is likely to take a considerable period of time. Therefore, learned counsel prays that the applicant be enlarged on regular bail. 3 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed. She further submits that, at the time of the incident, the applicant was found present in the vehicle. It is also submitted that the alleged contraband substance recovered from the joint possession of the applicant and the other co-accused persons is less than the commercial quantity. However, learned State counsel fairly endorses the fact that the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. After hearing the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties as well as considering the quantity of alleged contraband substance which has been recovered from the possession of the applicant, is less than the commercial quantity, also considering the fact that charge-sheet has been filed and there is no previous criminal antecedents, further, that the applicant is in jail since 06.03.2026 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take sometime, this Court is of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let applicant - Lalit Yadav involved in Crime No. 81/2026, registered at Out Post – Latori, Police Station – Jainagar, District - Surajpur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 20(B) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, for short, the NDPS Act, be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- 4 (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 her 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 her, 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 her in accordance with law. 8. Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Preeti