1 2026:CGHC:25431 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5455 of 2026 Shiv Kumar Dhimar S/o Punitram Dhimar Aged About 27 Years R/o Subhas Nagar, B.S.U.P. Colony, P.S. Telibandha, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, P.S. Khamtarai, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ...Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Shivendu Pandya, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Shailendra Sharma, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 22.06.2026 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. 175/2026 registered at Police Station – Khamtarai, District - Raipur (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act. VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.06.23 11:27:01 +0530 2 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 22.03.2026, the police personnel of Police Station Khamtarai, District Raipur (C.G.), received a credible secret information from an informant that the present applicant, along with other co-accused persons, was in possession of illicit Ganja and was engaged in its sale and transportation. Acting upon the said information, the police party proceeded to the spot and conducted a raid in accordance with law. During the raid, the applicant and other co-accused persons were found present at the spot. Upon search, a total quantity of 4.496 kilograms of Ganja was recovered and seized from their possession. After completing the necessary seizure and other procedural formalities, the police registered Crime No. 175/2026 for the offence punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. Thereafter, the matter was investigated, statements of witnesses were recorded, and upon completion of investigation, a charge-sheet was filed before the competent Court against the applicant and other co- accused persons. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case and has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. It is contended that the entire prosecution story is fabricated and concocted and that the alleged contraband Ganja was neither recovered from the exclusive nor conscious possession of the applicant. Learned counsel further submits that the place of seizure was an open place, not exclusively occupied or owned by the applicant, and therefore no presumption of conscious possession can be drawn against him. It is also argued that several mandatory 3 provisions of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, have not been complied with during the search and seizure proceedings, which casts serious doubt on the prosecution case. It is further submitted that the alleged quantity of 4.496 kilograms of Ganja cannot be attributed exclusively to the applicant and that no material has been collected during investigation to establish his involvement in the alleged offence under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act. Learned counsel submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedents, is the sole breadwinner of his family, and is responsible for maintaining his younger siblings. The applicant has been in judicial custody since 22.03.2026, causing severe hardship to his family, and the trial is not likely to conclude in the near future. It is further submitted that the investigation has been completed and the charge- sheet has already been filed before the competent Court; therefore, there is no possibility of the applicant interfering with the investigation or tampering with the prosecution evidence. In these circumstances, it is prayed that the applicant be enlarged on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State/non- applicant opposed the bail application and submitted that the charge- sheet has already been filed before the competent Court. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, it is observed that 4.496 kilograms of contraband has been seized from the possession of the applicant, which is less than the commercial quantity. Further, considering that the charge-sheet has already been 4 filed before the competent Court, the applicant has one criminal antecedents, and has been in custody since 22.03.2026, and that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time, this Court is of the considered view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 7. Let the Applicant – Shiv Kumar Dhimar, involved in Crime No. 175/2026 registered at Police Station – Khamtarai, District - Raipur (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, be released on bail on his 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 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 his 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. 5 (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 Vaibhav