1 CGHC010274822026 2026:CGHC:34584 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6672 of 2026 Kayamuddin, Aged About 61 Years, S/o Nizamuddin, R/o Behind Taj Engineering, Subhash Nagar, Moudahapara, Police Station - Moudahapara, District - Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station - City Kotwali Raipur District - Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondent For applicant : Smt. Fouzia Mirza, Senior Advocate with Mr. Navin Shukla, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Mr. Atanu Ghosh, Dy.G.A. SB: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge Order on Board 06/08/2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.133/2026 registered at Police Station City Kotwali Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 22 (C) & 29 of NDPS Act, 1985. GOURI MUDALIAR Digitally signed by GOURI MUDALIAR Date: 2026.08.06 19:26:37 +0530 2 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 21/03/2026 based on secret information, police of Police Station Kotwali, Raipur had searched Health Care & General Stores situated near liquor shop at Nehru Nagar, Raipur, upon which police found that the applicant is indulged in selling the prohibited tablets/drugs at higher rates without prescription of doctor and seized 1100 Alprazolam Tablets measuring 132 grams. Based on his memorandum statement, the other two co-accused persons were arrested and after investigation, charge sheet has been filed. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that according to the case of prosecution, the alleged tablets has been seized from Health Care & General Stores. The shop from where the tablets have been seized was run by son of the applicant and licence in this regard have also been issued in his name by the Licensing Authority, Food & Drugs Administration Department. She contended that unfortunately at the time of search, the applicant was found sitting there, otherwise he was not in the business of running the said shop. She also submit that one of the co-accused Manish Ahuja has been enlarged on bail in MCRC No.4859/2026 vide order dated 21/05/2026. She would submit that there is no criminal antecedents against the applicant, investigation has been completed and charge sheet has been filed, applicant is in jail since 22/03/2026 and conclusion of trial may take some time, hence the applicant be enlarged on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel would oppose the submission of learned counsel for the applicant and would submit that from the materials available in the charge sheet/case diary, it is evident 3 that there is prima facie material that the police during the course of search has seized 1100 Alprazolam Tablets from the drawer of the shop in which applicant was found sitting. He also submit that there is no seizure of any tablets from the co-accused Manish Ahuja, however he do not dispute the submission of learned counsel for the applicant with regard to no criminal antecedents against the applicant. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation levelled against the applicant, further the fact that co-accused Manish Ahuja has been enlarged on bail in MCRC No.4859/2026 vide order dated 21/05/2026, period of detention of the applicant since 22/03/2026, charge sheet has been filed, applicant has no criminal antecedents and also considering the fact that trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion, without commenting anything on the merits of the case, I am inclined to allow this bail application. 7. Accordingly, this bail application is allowed. 7. Accordingly, this bail application is allowed. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on regular bail, upon furnishing a bail bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court on the conditions that- (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. 4 (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. 8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge gouri