1 CGHC010277852026 2026:CGHC:30948 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR M.Cr.C No.6558 of 2026 1 - Tikeshwar Yadav S/o Damrudhar Yadav Aged About 19 Years R/o Village Kekarajhariya Police Station Lailunga, District Raigarh, C.G. 2 – Khileshwar Yadav, S/o Damrudhar Yadav, aged about 19 years, Village Rajaaama, Police Station Bagbahar, District Jashpur ... Applicants versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Excise Divisional Flying Squad, Surguja Division District Surguja C.G. ... Non-applicant _____________________________________________________ For Applicants :Mr. Pritam Singh, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State :Mrs. Smriti Shrivastava, PL. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board SISTLA NEELIMA VISHNU PRIYA Digitally signed by SISTLA NEELIMA VISHNU PRIYA Date: 2026.07.22 11:28:21 +0530 2 21.07.2026 1. The Applicants have preferred this 1st Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as they have been arrested in connection with Crime No.04/2026 registered at Police Station – Excise Divisional Flying Squad, Surguja Division, District Surguja (C.G.), for the offence under Section 20(b)(ii) (B) of the NDPS Act. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that acting on a secret information, the authorities intercepted the Applicants on 03.04.2026 at about 8:50 a.m. and allegedly recovered 7.384 kilograms and 7.425 kilograms of ganja respectively, aggregating to 14.809 kilograms. The material collected by the prosecution during investigation prima facie indicates the involvement of the Applicants/accused in the commission of the alleged offence. Hence this application. 3. Learned Counsel for the Applicants submits that the Applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the alleged seizure was effected from an open place and the Applicants were not present at the spot at the relevant time. It is further submitted that the Applicants neither committed nor participated in any 3 act constituting the alleged offence. It is also submitted that the Applicants are in judicial custody since 03.04.2026 and the trial is likely to take considerable time for its conclusion, therefore, they may be granted bail. 4. On the other hand, learned Counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submits that there are no previous criminal antecedents against the present Applicants. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the submissions advanced by learned Counsel for the parties, the nature of allegations, the material available in the case diary, the quantity of contraband, the fact that the Applicants are in custody since 03.04.2026 and that there are no previous criminal antecedents against them, the fact that the trial is likely to take considerable time for its conclusion and without further commenting anything on the merits of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that it is a fit case to allow the application. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 7. Let Applicants- Tikeshwar Yadav and Khileshwar Yadav involved in Crime No.04/2026 registered at Police Station – Excise Divisional Flying Squad, Surguja Division, District Surguja (C.G.), for the offence under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of 4 the NDPS Act be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant/s shall file an undertaking to the effect that he/they 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/sshall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his/their counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him/them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant/s misuse/s the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his/their presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicant/s fail/s to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him/them, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicant/s 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/s 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/them in accordance with law. 8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the 5 trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Priya