1 CGHC010310802026 2026:CGHC:36004 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No.7481 of 2026 Aashish George S/o Raju George, Aged About 23 Years R/o Kumharpara, Maa Bhavani Chowk, Jagdalpur, District Bastar C. G. ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Kotwali, Jagdalpur, District Bastar C. G. ... Non-applicant _____________________________________________________ For Applicant :Mr. Gajendra Prakash Sahu, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State :Ms. Ankita Shukla, PL. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 13.08.2026 1. The Applicant has preferred this 1st Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.154/2026 registered at Police Station – Kotwali, Jagdalpur, District Bastar (C.G.), for the offence under Section 21(b) of NDPS Act. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 09.04.2026 at about SISTLA NEELIMA VISHNU PRIYA Digitally signed by SISTLA NEELIMA VISHNU PRIYA Date: 2026.08.14 11:15:58 +0530 2 07:10 P.M., the Investigating Officer, Assistant Sub-Inspector Parimal Das, Police Station Kotwali, District Bastar, received secret information that two persons were standing near the roadside beside a motorcycle and were in possession of psychotropic tablets for sale. Acting upon the said information, the police party along with independent witnesses reached the spot and intercepted two persons sitting on a black Splendor motorcycle bearing Registration No. CG17-KY-6487, who disclosed their identities as the present Applicant and Digeshwar Devdas. Upon search of a yellow-coloured carry bag allegedly kept in their joint possession, 58 strips of Alprazolam tablets, containing 15 tablets in each strip, totalling 870 tablets, were seized. Cash amounting to Rs.130/- was also seized from the present Applicant. Accordingly, the offence was registered and investigation was taken up and the Applicant was duly arrested. Hence this application. 3. Learned Counsel for the Applicant submits that the Applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the alleged recovery of 87 grams of Alprazolam is more than the small quantity of 5 grams but less than the commercial quantity of 100 grams and therefore, falls within the intermediate quantity, to which 3 the rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act are not applicable. It is further submitted that the mandatory safeguards and search procedure prescribed under the NDPS Act have not been duly complied with and that both the seizure witnesses have failed to identify the Applicant before the learned Trial Court and have turned hostile. It is also contended that the alleged recovery was made from a bag stated to be in the joint possession of the Applicant and co-accused Digeshwar Devdas and no specific act or exclusive conscious possession has been attributed to the Applicant, which is a matter to be established during trial. Learned Counsel further submits that the Applicant is in judicial custody since 10.04.2026 and conclusion of trial is likely to take considerable time, therefore, he may be granted bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed and the present Applicant has one previous criminal antecedent under the NDPS Act of the year 2024, in which he has been acquitted. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the submissions advanced by learned Counsel for the parties, the material available in the case diary, the 4 nature of allegations, the alleged seizure of 87 grams of Alprazolam, which is more than the small quantity but less than the commercial quantity, the fact that the alleged recovery was made from a bag stated to be in joint possession of the Applicant and co-accused, the fact that the seizure witnesses have not supported the prosecution case regarding identification of the Applicant, the period of custody of the Applicant since 10.04.2026, the fact that the charge- sheet has already been filed, the Applicant has one previous criminal antecedent under the NDPS Act in which he has been acquitted, trial is likely to take considerable time for its conclusion and without further commenting anything on the merits of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that it is a fit case to allow the application. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 7. Let Applicant- Aashish George involved in Crime No. 154/2026 registered at Police Station – Kotwali, Jagdalpur, District Bastar (C.G.), for the offence under Section 21(b) of NDPS Act be released on bail on his furnishing a 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/she shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present 5 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/her counsel. In case of his/her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him/her 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/her 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/her, 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/her 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 forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Priya