1 CGHC010276552026 2026:CGHC:30688 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6469 of 2026 Rajveer Singh S/o Jasveer Singh Aged About 23 Years R/o Behind Nigam, New Kursipar, Bhilai, District Durg Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, P.S. Kotwali, District Raipur Commissionerate Chhattisgarh. ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Ms. Aditi Singhvi, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Smriti Shrivstava, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 20.07.2026 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. 215/2026 registered at Police Station - Kotwali, District - Raipur Commissionerate (C.G.) for the offence under Sections 21(a) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief is that the police of Police Station - Kotwali, District - Raipur Commissionerate (C.G.), received a secret information from the informant and on the said information police conducted a raid and seized contraband article i.e. 11.990 gm of heroine from the joint possession of the present applicant and co- RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 accused persons. Thereafter, offence punishable under Sections 21(a) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 has been registered against present applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. She further submits that the contraband article i.e. 11.990 gm of heroine was not seized from the joint possession of the present applicant and co-accused. She also submits that prosecution agency has not followed the provisions under Section 42 of the NDPS Act. She also submits that the co-accused persons namely Mohd. Ayan and Mohd Shareef have been granted bail by the learned trial Court vide order dated 03.07.2026 and 06.07.2026 respectively. She further submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedents under the NDPS Act only one case is registered under the BNS against the applicant which is pending, the charge-sheet has been submitted before the competent Court, and he is in jail since 03.05.2026 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. Therefore, She prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the charge- sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court. She further submits that from then joint possession of the present applicant and co-accused persons the contraband article i.e. 1.990 gm of heroine was seized. She also submits that the applicant has one previous criminal antecedent under the BNS which is pending, therefore, the present applicant is not entitled for 3 grant of bail. 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 that the present applicant has no criminal antecedents under the NDPS Act and also considering the fact that in the present bail application the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and he is in jail since 03.05.2026 and conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the Applicant – Rajveer Singh, involved in Crime No. 215/2026 registered at Police Station - Kotwali, District - Raipur Commissionerate (C.G.) for the offence under Sections 21(a) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, be released on bail on 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 4 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/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan