1 2026:CGHC:25649 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5498 of 2026 Mahesh Kumar Yadav S/o Ramratan Aged About 30 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, Dy. Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 23.06.2026 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. 81/2026 registered at Police Outpost Latori, Police Station – Jainagar, District – Surajpur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 20(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. 2. As per the brief facts of the prosecution case, on 06.03.2026, the police were conducting vehicle checking at Main Road, Latori. During the checking, the police noticed a vehicle coming from Ambikapur. On ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2026.06.23 15:19:03 +0530 2 seeing the police, the person driving the vehicle stopped it and attempted to turn it around. Upon suspicion, the police chased the vehicle. During the chase, two persons allegedly absconded from the vehicle, whereas three persons were apprehended by the police, who disclosed their names as Lalit Yadav (driver of the vehicle), Jeevdhan Paikara, and Surendra Kumar Laskar. Initially, the aforesaid three persons were arrested by the police, and the investigation commenced. During the course of investigation, on the basis of the memorandum statements of the co-accused persons, the name of the present applicant surfaced as one of the persons who had allegedly absconded from the vehicle. 3. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that prosecution agency has not followed the provisions under Section 42 of the NDPS Act and not taken search warrant from the superior authority. He also submits that the present applicant has no criminal antecedents. He further submits that the co-accused persons, namely, Parmeshwar Dewangan has already been granted regular bail by this Court in MCRC No. 5300 of 2026, vide order dated 18.06.2026, hence the applicant is also entitled to be released on bail on the ground of parity. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel would oppose the bail application and submit that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent 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 as the co-accused person, namely, Parmeshwar Dewangan has already been granted regular bail by this Court in MCRC No. 5300 of 2026, vide order 3 dated 18.06.2026, moreover, the charge-sheet has already been submitted before the competent Court in the present case, therefore, this Court is of the considered view that the present applicant is also entitled to be grant regular bail on the ground of parity in this Case. 7. Let the Applicant – Mahesh Kumar Yadav, involved in Crime No. 81/2026 registered at Police Outpost Latori, Police Station – Jainagar, District – Surajpur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 20(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, be released on bail on his furnishing 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 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 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 4 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 Sd/- Abhishek