1 CGHC010179982026 2026:CGHC:28546 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4452 of 2026 Rahul Kumar Shah S/o. Mukesh Kumar Shah Aged About 27 Years R/o. Heerapur, Veersavarker Nagar, R.D.A.- 208-D, P.S.- Kabeer Nagar, Raipur (Revenue and Civil) District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station- Khamtarai, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Yogesh Pandey, Advocate For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Shailendra Sharma, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 09.07.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 120/2026, registered at Police Station - Khamtarai, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 22(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985. 2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that on the date of the incident, i.e., 20.02.2026, the police received secret information that certain persons were in possession of contraband substances and were attempting to sell the same behind High Tech Parking. Acting upon the said information, the PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2026.07.10 11:30:12 +0530 2 police conducted a raid at the spot and seized Nitrosun-10 (Nitrazepam Tablets IP) from the accused persons. From Accused No. 1, Rahul Shah, 10 strips weighing a total of 145.30 grams were seized. From Accused No. 2, Avinash Kumar, 20 strips weighing a total of 145.30 grams were seized. From Accused No. 3, Roshan Yadav, 20 strips weighing a total of 72.59 grams were seized. Further, from Motorcycle No. CG04 QF-9783, 7 strips of Spasmo Proxyvon Plus weighing a total of 43.28 grams were seized. Thus, from the joint possession of the accused persons, Nitrazepam/Proxyvon tablets weighing a total of 363.19 grams and Tramadol weighing a total of 43.28 grams were seized. Thereafter, the memorandum statements of the accused persons were recorded and the seizure panchnama was prepared. On the basis of the aforesaid seizure, the applicant and the other accused persons were arrested, and after completion of the investigation, the charge-sheet was filed. The police registered the offence under Section 22(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act). 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the applicant has three previous criminal antecedents, out of which two cases are registered under the Excise Act and one case is registered under the IPC. Out of the two Excise Act cases, the applicant has been acquitted in one case, while the other is still pending. The IPC case is also pending. The details of the criminal antecedents have been explained in Paragraph No. 4(A) of the present bail application. It is further submitted that the applicant has been in judicial custody since 20.02.2026, the charge-sheet has already been filed, and the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude. Therefore, it is prayed that the applicant be enlarged on regular bail. 3 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed. He further submits that the total quantity of the contraband substance recovered from the joint possession of the applicant and the co-accused persons is less than the commercial quantity. However, the applicant has three previous criminal antecedents. Therefore, it is submitted that the applicant is not entitled to be enlarged on bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation made against the applicant and the fact that the total quantity of the contraband substance recovered from the joint possession of the applicant and the co-accused persons is less than the commercial quantity, further The details of the criminal antecedents have been explained in Paragraph No. 4(A) of the present bail application, the charge-sheet has been filed and the applicant is in jail since 20.02.2026 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time, I am inclined to grant bail to the applicant. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant - Rahul Kumar Shah involved in Crime No. 120/2026, registered at Police Station - Khamtarai, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 22(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985, 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 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 4 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/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Preeti