1 CGHC010238612026 2026:CGHC:31544 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5619 of 2026 Naseeb Khan S/o Shakil Khan Aged About 29 Years R/o Nurani Chowk, P.S. Dharsiwa, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh. (As Per Challan) --- Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Mujgahan, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh. --- Non-Applicant MCRC No. 5761 of 2026 1 - Mohammed Arif S/o Mohammed Khalil Aged About 32 Years R/o Bsup Colony Kathadih Block 43 Makan No. 014 P.S. Mujgahan, District - Raipur, Chhattisgarh, Permanent Address - Near Khan Murgi House Sargaon, P.S. - Sargaon, District - Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, ( As Per Challan), 2 - Nargis Fatima W/o Naseeb Khan Aged About 26 Years R/o Bsup Colony Kathadih Block 43 Makan No. 014 P.S. Mujgahan, District - Raipur, Chhattisgarh, Permanent Address - Nurani Chowk P.S. - Dharsiwa, District - Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ( As Per Challan) ---Applicants Versus KRISHNA KUMAR BARVE Digitally signed by KRISHNA KUMAR BARVE Date: 2026.07.24 11:38:36 +0530 2 State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station - Mujgahan, District - Raipur, Chhattisgarh. --- Non-Applicant For Applicants : Shri Ashish Gangwani, Advocate. For Non-Applicant : Shri Sourabh Sahu, PL. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 23/07/2026 1. Since the aforesaid bail applications arise out of same crime number, they are being disposed of by this common order. 2. These are the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No.94/2026 registered at Police Station Mujgahan, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence under Section 20 (B) of the NDPS Act. 3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on receiving secret information from the informant on 22.4.2026, the concerned Police has recovered 4.916 kg of contraband Ganja from possession of applicant – Mohammed Arif and on the basis of his memorandum, other accused persons were arrested. Hence the present bail applications. 4. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the 3 crime. Applicant – Naseeb Khan does not have any criminal antecedents, whereas as against applicant – Mohammed Arif, one case has been registered against him under the IPC. They are in jail since 22.4.2026. Therefore, the applicants may be released on bail. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State/non- applicant would oppose the bail applications and submit that Applicant – Naseeb Khan does not have any criminal antecedents, whereas as against applicant – Mohammed Arif, 5 cases have been registered against him, and the charge sheet has been submitted against them. Therefore, the bail applications may be rejected. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, and the fact that the charge sheet has already been submitted against the applicants, Applicant – Naseeb Khan does not have any criminal antecedents, whereas as against applicant – Mohammed Arif, 5 cases have been registered against him, which are old cases, they are in jail since 22.4.2026 and further considering the quantity of contraband which appears to be less than commercial quantity and conclusion of trial is likely to take some time, this Court is of the view that the applicants are entitled 4 to be released on bail in the present case. Accordingly, the Applications are allowed. 8. Let the Applicant – Naseeb Khan, Mohammed Arif & Nargis Fatima, involved in Crime No.94/2026 registered at Police Station Mujgahan, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence under Section 20 (B) of the NDPS Act, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two sureties each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that 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 applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants misuse 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 applicants shall remain present, in person, 5 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 applicants are 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 them in accordance with law. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Barve