1 CGHC010268242026 2026:CGHC:35683 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6579 of 2026 Vinod S/o Jhumuklal Bisen Aged About 37 Years R/o Changatola Police Station- Changatola, Balaghat District (M.P.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Officer, Police Station- Sankra, District- Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Aditya Bhardwaj, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Monika Thakur, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 12.08.2026 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.192/2025 registered at Police Station – Sankra, District - Mahasamund (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Section 20(b) of the NDPS Act. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 25.12.2025, Police Station Sankra received secret information that four persons were travelling VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.08.13 11:37:54 +0530 2 from Odisha towards Sankra on two motorcycles carrying illicit ganja. Acting on the information, the police laid a blockade at Guru Ghasidas Chowk on NH-53 Road and intercepted the motorcycles. During search, 15 kg of ganja was allegedly recovered from a sack carried by Vinod and 5 kg of ganja from a bag carried by Hariram, making a total recovery of 20 kg of ganja, valued at approximately Rs.2,00,000/-. Accordingly, the offence was registered against the accused persons and investigation was initiated. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case and that the alleged recovery is doubtful, as no independent witness has supported the prosecution case. It is submitted that the applicant has been in custody since 25.12.2025 and the alleged quantity recovered from the applicant is 15 kg of ganja, which is below the commercial quantity of 20 kg; therefore, the rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act are not attracted. Learned counsel further submits that the mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act, including the safeguards relating to search and seizure, have not been duly complied with and there is also doubt regarding compliance with Section 42 of the Act. It is further submitted that the co-accused Nariram and Vijay have already been granted bail by this Court in M.Cr.C. No. 2882 of 2026 and, therefore, on the ground of parity also, the present applicant is entitled to the benefit of bail. The applicant has no previous involvement in any offence under the NDPS Act, there is no likelihood of tampering with the evidence or influencing the witnesses, and the trial is likely to take considerable time. The applicant is ready to furnish adequate bail bonds and abide by all 3 conditions imposed by this Hon’ble Court. Therefore, it is prayed that the applicant be released on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State, opposes the bail application of the applicant. 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, the nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the present applicant, and the fact that the co-accused, namely Nariram and Vijay, have already been granted bail by this Court in M.Cr.C. No. 2882 of 2026 vide order dated 02.07.2026, and that the case of the present applicant stands on the same footing, further considering that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court, that the applicant has no criminal antecedents, has been in judicial custody since 25.12.2025, and that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 7. Let applicant, Vinod, involved in Crime No.192/2025 registered at Police Station – Sankra, District - Mahasamund (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Section 20(b) of the NDPS Act, 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 4 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. (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. 8. Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE vaibhav