1 CGHC010266802026 2026:CGHC:35686 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6271 of 2026 1 - Anil Ahirwar S/o Ramkishan Ahirwar Aged About 30 Years R/o Ahmed Nagar Bader, Police Station Vidisha Dehat, District Vidisha M.P. ... Applicant(s) versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station - Gudhiyari, District Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Sudeep Verma, Advocate For Respondent(s)/State : Mr. Sourabh Sahu, 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 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, “BNSS”), seeking grant of regular bail to the applicant, who is in judicial custody in connection with Crime No. 112/2026 registered at Police Station Gudhiyari, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh), for the offence punishable RUCHI YADAV Digitally signed by RUCHI YADAV 2 under Section 20(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, “NDPS Act”). 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 11.03.2026, the police of Police Station Gudhiyari, Raipur, received secret information that the accused was carrying a large quantity of illegal narcotic substance (Ganja) in a dark blue bag near the railway track in front of Old Ramnagar Police Post. Acting upon the information, the police conducted a raid and seized 5.206 kg of Ganja kept in three packets wrapped with brown-yellow cello tape from the possession of the accused. Accordingly, Crime No. 112/2026 was registered against him under Section 20(b) of the NDPS Act. After completion of investigation, the charge-sheet was filed before the competent Court. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the alleged quantity of 5.206 kg of Ganja seized from the applicant is below the prescribed commercial quantity of 20 kg and, therefore, the rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act are not attracted. Learned counsel further submits that the investigation has been completed and the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court. The applicant has been in judicial custody since 11.03.2026 and, considering the nature of the offence and the quantity allegedly seized, his continued incarceration is not warranted. It is also submitted that the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude. Therefore, considering the period of detention and the overall facts and circumstances of the case, it is prayed that the applicant be enlarged on regular bail. 3 4. Learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that, though the charge-sheet has been filed, the applicant has five criminal antecedents. Considering the nature of the allegations, the material available on record and the quantity of Ganja seized, it is prayed that the bail application be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the quantity of Ganja allegedly seized from the applicant, which is below the commercial quantity, the fact that the investigation has been completed and the charge-sheet has been filed, the period of detention of the applicant since 11.03.2026, and the fact that the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude, this Court is of the considered view that the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. Accordingly, without commenting on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed. 7. Let the Applicant –Anil Ahirwar involved in Crime No. 112/2026 registered at Police Station Gudhiyari, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh), 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 4 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 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. 5 8. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall make an earnest endeavour to conclude the trial expeditiously from the receipt of this order in accordance with law, if there is no legal impediment. 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 Ruchi