1 CGHC010291952026 2026:CGHC:32937 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6920 of 2026 Rajaram Sonwani S/o Kana Ram Sonwani Aged About 36 Years R/o Village Sothi Police Station Sakti, District- Sakti (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station- Jutemill, District- Raigarh (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Shri Dhirendra Prasad Mishra, Advocate. For Non-Applicant : Miss Palak Dwivedi, PL. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 30/07/2026 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.381/2024 registered at Police Station Jutemill, District Raigarh (C.G.) for the offence under Section 20 (b) of the NDPS Act. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on the basis of secret KRISHNA KUMAR BARVE Digitally signed by KRISHNA KUMAR BARVE Date: 2026.08.01 12:07:52 +0530 2 information received from the informant, on 28.8.2024 the concerned Police has conducted a raid near Kodatarai Airstrip in the Jutemill Police Station of Raigarh and seized two sacks from white Alto Car No.CG-13/AS-6967 and 3 sacks were seized from a small Tata S Gold Car No.CG-13/AM-2987, totalling 175 kg of Narcotic drugs Ganja while being transported for sale in the presence of witnesses. Thereafter the FIR was registered against the accused persons. According to the memorandum statement of accused Santram Khunte, 2 cars, 6 mobile phones and cash were seized when the other accused persons namely, Bhagwat Sahu, Deepak @ Nanhu Bhardwaj, Vyomkesh @ Vyoma and Kishore Sahu were found smuggling Ganja together. Hence the bail application. 3. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the crime. It is submitted that similarly placed co-accused persons, namely Vyomesh Khatua and Deepak @ Nanhu Bharadwaj, whose bail applications (MCRC No.7090/2025 and MCRC No.6013/2025) were earlier rejected by this Court on 07.09.2025 and 31.07.2025 respectively, approached the Hon’ble Supreme Court and have been granted bail in SLP (Criminal) Nos.14183/2025 and 15232/2025 vide order dated 17.11.2025. He further submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and is in jail since 28.08.2024 and conclusion of trial is likely to take quite long time. 3 Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant on the ground of parity. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court. She further submits that 175 kg Ganja has been seized from the joint possession of the present applicant along with co-accused persons, therefore, the present applicant is not entitled for 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 and that the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court, the fact that similarly placed co-accused persons, namely Vyomesh Khatua and Deepak @ Nanhu Bharadwaj, whose bail applications (MCRC No.7090/2025 and MCRC No.6013/2025) were earlier rejected by this Court on 07.09.2025 and 31.07.2025 respectively, approached the Hon’ble Supreme Court and have been granted bail in SLP (Criminal) Nos.14183/2025 and 15232/2025 vide order dated 17.11.2025, this Court is of the considered view that the applicant stands on the same footing as the said co-accused, further the applicant has no criminal antecedents and he is in jail since 28.08.2024, therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case on the ground of parity. 4 7. Let the Applicant – Rajaram Sonwani, involved in Crime No.381/2024 registered at Police Station Jutemill, District Raigarh (C.G.) for the offence under Section 20 (b) of the NDPS 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 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 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 5 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 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. 8. 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