1 CGHC010239662026 2026:CGHC:32384 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5838 of 2026 Sunil Harijan (Tandi) Son Of Karan Harijan, Aged About 18 Years Resident Of Narla Road, Tulagaon, P.S. Narla, District- Kalahandi (Odisha) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer, Police Station Sargaon, District- Mungeli Chhattigarh. ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Banhiman Roy, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Sumit Singh, Deputy Advocate General Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 28.07.2026 1. This is the Second Bail Application filed under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 53/2025, registered at Police Station- Sargaon, District- Mungeli, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 20(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, the ‘NDPS Act’). 2. The earlier bail application of the applicant being MCRC No. 10075/2025 was rejected by this Court vide order dated 09.12.2025 on merits. RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the Police Station Sargaon received secret information from an informant that certain persons were illegally transporting contraband ganja in a Maruti Swift Dzire car from Mungeli towards Janjgir. Acting upon the said information, the police conducted a search and intercepted the vehicle, during which 45 kilograms of contraband ganja was allegedly recovered and seized from the spot. On the basis of the said seizure and the material collected during investigation, the police registered an offence punishable under Section 20(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, against the present applicant and other co-accused persons. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that this is the second bail application, earlier bail application of the applicant being MCRC No. 10075/2025 was rejected by this Hon’ble Court vide order dated 09.12.2025 on merits. He further submits that the earlier bail application of another co-accused namely Monu Kushwaha, being MCRC No. 9517/2025 was rejected by this Court vide order dated 24.11.2025 on merits, against which he preferred a regular bail application before the Hon’ble Apex Court as SLP (Crl.) No. 2949/2026, and the Hon’ble Apex Court granted bail to him vide order dated 06.04.2026. He further submits that another co- accused person namely, Shri Ram Kurre, has already been granted bail by this Hon’ble Court in MCRC No. 3422/2026 vide order dated 07.05.2026. He further submits that the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents and he is in jail since 07.06.2025, the charge- sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its 3 conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of second bail to the applicant on the ground of parity. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application of the applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court, but could not dispute the fact that co-accused persons has already been granted bail by the Hon’ble Supreme Court as well as by this Court and the case of the present applicant is identical to that of the co-accused. 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 that this is the applicant’s second bail application and that the earlier application, MCRC No. 10075/2025 was rejected by this Court vide order dated 09.12.2025 on merits, further considering the fact that the earlier bail application of another co-accused namely Monu Kushwaha, being MCRC No. 9517/2025 was rejected by this Court vide order dated 24.11.2025 on merits, against which he preferred a regular bail application before the Hon’ble Apex Court as SLP (Crl.) No. 2949/2026, and the Hon’ble Apex Court granted bail to him vide order dated 06.04.2026 and also another co-accused person namely, Shri Ram Kurre, has already been granted bail by this Court in MCRC No. 3422/2026 vide order dated 07.05.2026, further considering that the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents and he is in jail since 07.06.2025, the charge-sheet has been filed, therefore, this Court is 4 of the view that the applicant is also entitled to be released on second bail on the ground of parity. 8. Accordingly, the second bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the Applicant – Sunil Harijan (Tandi), involved in Crime No. 53/2025, registered at Police Station- Sargaon, District- Mungeli, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 20(B) 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 his counsel. In case of her 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 5 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. 9. 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