Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 319 (CHH)

SALEEM MOSANI @ SALAM MOSANI v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

MCRC/825/2026 · 2026-01-22

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2026:CGHC:4113 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 825 of 2026 Saleem Mosani @ Salam Mosani S/o Abdul Gaffar Mosani Aged About 24 Years R/o Arekel Depa Basna, Police Station And Tahsil Basna, District Mahasamund (C.G.) ...Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Basna, District Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. kishore Narayan, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 23.01.2026 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. 335/2025 registered at Police Station – Basna District - Mahasamund (C.G.) for the offence under Section 20(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. 2. As per prosecution, the crux of the case is That, the prosecution case, in brief, is that on 28.08.2025 at about 14:00 hours, the present applicant Salam Mushani along with co-accused Sagar Sinde was VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.01.23 16:24:15 +0530 2 allegedly found at a vacant ground adjacent to the Tehsil Office, Arekel Dipa, Basna, District Mahasamund, and acting upon secret information, the police reached the spot and intercepted both the accused persons, whereupon the present applicant was allegedly found in possession of a white polythene bag containing prohibited narcotic injections namely Pentazocine Lactate Injection IP and the co-accused was also found carrying similar injections in a separate polythene bag, and upon counting, a total of 93 injections (1 ml each) of Pentazocine Lactate Injection IP valued at approximately Rs.2,724.90 were allegedly recovered from their joint possession, for which neither of the accused could produce any valid licence or authorization, and apart from the said contraband, from the possession of the present applicant one mobile phone and cash of Rs.1,410/- were allegedly seized, while from the co-accused one mobile phone and a small amount of cash were also seized, on the basis of which an offence under Section 21 of the NDPS Act was registered and the present applicant was arrested on 28.08.2025 and investigation commenced. 3. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits applicant has been in judicial custody since 28.08.2025 and the charge-sheet has already been filed; that the mandatory procedures prescribed under the NDPS Act have not been followed by the investigating agency; that the alleged seized contraband is of intermediate quantity and charges have been framed against the applicant under Section 21(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act vide order dated 05.12.2025, that the applicant is the 3 sole bread earner of his family and his continued incarceration would cause severe financial hardship to his dependents; that he is a permanent resident of the address shown in the cause title, having movable and immovable properties therein and, therefore, there is no likelihood of his absconding; and that the applicant undertakes to furnish adequate surety and to abide by all terms and conditions as may be imposed by this Hon’ble Court while granting bail. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State/non- applicant would oppose the bail application. 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, namely that 93 injections (1 ml each) of Pentazocine Lactate Injection IP was allegedly recovered from the joint possession of the present applicant and the co-accused, which is less than the commercial quantity, and further considering the fact that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court and that the applicant has been in custody since 28.08.2025, and as the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, this Court is of the considered view that the applicant deserves to be released on bail in the present case. 7. 7. Let the Applicant - Saleem Mosani @ Salam Mosani involved in Crime No. 335/2025 registered at Police Station – Basna District - Mahasamund (C.G.) for the offence 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 4 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 counsel. In case of her 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 him 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/- - (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaibhav