1 CGHC010267882026 2026:CGHC:30631 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6389 of 2026 Anil Soni S/o Late Vijay Soni Aged About 37 Years R/o Ward No. 05, Opposite To Noor Masjid, P.S. Supela Bhilai District Durg C.G. ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- P.S. Ghumka, District – Rajnandgaon, C.G. ...Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Rajesh Jain and Ms. Kiran Jain, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Shubham Bajpai, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 20.07.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this Second Bail Application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 152/2024, registered at Police Station : Ghumka, District – Rajnandgaon (C.G) for the offence punishable under Sections 20(B)(ii)(c) and 29 of the N.D.P.S. Act. 2. The earlier bail application of the applicant has been rejected on merits by this Court vide order dated 04.07.2025 passed in MCRC No. 5192/2026. 3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on dated 24-10-2024 on the basis of information of informer, investigation officer seized 65.565 kg of Ganja, which was kept in 64 packets from the vehicle Tata DI 207 bearing registration No. C.G.04 JB 1697 from possession of Accused RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 Bedabar Patro and Dhanraj Patel. That during investigation Memorandum of the Bedabar Patro and Dhanraj Patel was recorded in which he stated that Anil Soni had brought Ganja and given to him for delivery to Akash Yadav at Jabalpur. Hence, this application. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended that the investigation has been completed and the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court and only 13 out of 21 prosecution witnesses have been examined. Learned counsel submits that the applicant is remained in judicial custody since 25.10.2024, and the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude. It is also contended that the co-accused, Mukesh Tiwari @ Bablu Tiwari, has been granted bail by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 15.06.2026 passed in SLP (Cri.) No. 6184/2026 and, therefore, the applicant is also entitled to the benefit of bail on the ground of parity. 5. On the other hand learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case, but he could not dispute the fact that the co-accused person has already been granted bail by this Hon’ble Supreme Court. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the allegations levelled against the applicant, the fact that though the applicant's first bail application was rejected on merits, and further considering that the co-accused, Mukesh Tiwari @ Bablu Tiwari, has been granted bail by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 3 15.06.2026 passed in SLP (Cri.) No. 6184/2026, the charge-sheet has already been filed, only 13 out of 21 prosecution witnesses have been examined so far, and the applicant has remained in judicial custody since 25.10.2024, coupled with the fact 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. 8. Accordingly, the instant second bail application of the applicant is allowed. 9. Let the applicant – Anil Soni, involved in Crime No. 152/2024, registered at Police Station : Ghumka, District – Rajnandgaon (C.G) for the offence punishable under Sections 20(B)(ii)(c) and 29 of the N.D.P.S. Act, be released on bail on 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 Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. 4 (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. 10. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed with the trial and conclude the same, expeditiously. 11. 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 Rajshekhar