1 CGHC010216042026 2026:CGHC:34803 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5092 of 2026 Rohit Bhosle S/o Ashok Bhosle Aged About 32 Years R/o Village Changle Nagar Ambad Police Station Ambad District Jalana M.H. --- Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through- O/cer In Charge Police Station Sankra District Mahasamund C.G. --- Non-Applicant Along with MCRC No. 5782 of 2026 Kishan Pawar S/o Pandurang Pawar Aged About 32 Years R/o Village Ambad, Police Station Ambad, Distt. Jalana, (M.H.) --- Applicant Versus State of Chhattisgarh Through O/cer In Charge, Police Station Sankra, District Mahasamund (C.G.) --- Non-Applicant For Applicants : Mr. Arun Kumar Shukla, Advocate For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 07.08.2026 1. Since the above-mentioned two ;rst bail applications arise out of same incident, same crime number and registered at same police station, they are clubbed and heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 2. The applicants have preferred these First Bail Applications under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as they have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 81/2026 registered at Police Station Sankra, District Mahasamund (C.G.) for the o<ence under Section 20(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. 3. Case of the prosecution, in brief is that on 25.04.2026, the police received secret information from a reliable informer that a consignment of illegal contraband (Ganja) was being transported from Cuttack, Odisha, in a white coloured XUV vehicle bearing registration No. MH-12-JU-8769 and that a white coloured Dzire car bearing registration No. MH-24-AF-2235 was escorting (piloting) the said vehicle. Acting upon the said information, the police reached the spot and laid surveillance. After some time, the Dzire car was seen approaching from the Basna side, followed by the XUV vehicle. Both vehicles were intercepted. On inquiry, the driver of the Dzire car disclosed his name as Rohit Bhosale (present applicant), while the other occupants included two juvenile children, who disclosed their identities. They informed the police that they were escorting the XUV vehicle carrying Ganja from Cuttack, Odisha. Thereafter, the occupants of the XUV vehicle were questioned, wherein the driver disclosed his name as Manoj Sangle, the person seated beside him disclosed his name as Kishan Pawar (present applicant), the person seated behind the driver disclosed his name as Ranjit Gholap, and another juvenile boy disclosed his identity. Upon search of the XUV vehicle, 12 3 packets containing Ganja, packed in onion-coloured plastic bags wrapped with foil and brown adhesive tape, weighing a total of 12.563 kilograms and valued at approximately ₹6,00,000/-, were recovered from beneath the rear seat of the vehicle. The contraband was seized from the conscious and joint possession of the accused persons in accordance with law, and they were arrested. Consequently, the present bail applications have been preferred by the applicants. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended that no contraband was recovered from the conscious possession of either of the present applicants, namely, Rohit Bhosale and Kishan Pawar. It is further submitted that the alleged recovery of 12.563 kilograms of Ganja was e<ected from the XUV vehicle bearing registration No. MH-12-JU-8769, whereas applicant Rohit Bhosale was travelling in the Dzire car bearing registration No. MH-24-AF-2235 from which no contraband was recovered. So far as applicant Kishan Pawar is concerned, it is submitted that there is no material on record to establish that he was in conscious possession of the alleged contraband or had any knowledge of its presence in the vehicle. He further argues that the prosecution has failed to establish any direct nexus, conscious possession, prior meeting of minds, or criminal conspiracy between the applicants and the alleged transportation of the contraband. It is contended that no incriminating article has been recovered from the applicants personally, and their implication is based merely on 4 assumptions and memorandum statements without any independent corroborative evidence. It is further submitted that mere presence in the respective vehicles is not su/cient to attract the rigours of Section 20(b) of the NDPS Act unless conscious possession and active involvement are established by cogent material. He further submits that the present applicants have no criminal antecedents under the NDPS Act, the charge-sheet has been submitted before the competent Court and they are in jail since 26.04.2026, and conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicants. 5. On the other hand, learned Panel Lawyer opposes the bail application of the present applicants and submit that the charge- sheet has already been ;led in the present case before the competent Court and also endorse the submission made by the learned counsel for the applicant. She further submits that the contraband article i.e. 12.563 kilograms of Ganja was seized from the joint possession of the applicants and other co-accused, therefore, the present applicants are not entitled for grant of bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case that the contraband article i.e. 12.563 kilograms of Ganja has been recovered from them, which is less than commercial quantity, further the present applicants have no criminal antecedents under the NDPS Act, and also considering the fact that in the present bail 5 applications the charge-sheet has been ;led before the competent Court and they are in jail since 26.04.2026 and conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this case. 8. Accordingly, the bail applications of the applicants are allowed. Let the Applicants – Rohit Bhosle and Kishan Pawar, involved in Crime No. 81/2026 registered at Police Station Sankra, District Mahasamund (C.G.) for the o<ence 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 each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicants shall ;le an undertaking to the e<ect that they shall not seek any adjournment on the dates ;xed 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 applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date ;xed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without su/cient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail 6 during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the court on the date ;xed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicants shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates ;xed 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 su/cient 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. 9. O/ce is directed to provide a certi;ed copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan