1 CGHC010317922026 2026:CGHC:37478 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7753 of 2026 Lavlesh @ Ravindra Patel S/o Kasiprasad Aged About 40 Years R/o Dehruch Maphi, Thana Raipura, District Chitrakut Dham, (Uttar Pradesh) ... Petitioner versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The District Magistrate, Raigarh District Raigarh C. G. ----Concerned Police Chowki, Jobi, Thana Kharsiya. ... Respondent (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Applicant : Mr. Hari Agrawal, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Mr. K. G. Yadav, Dy. Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board 20.08.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 480/2025, registered at Police Chowki -Jobi, Thana Kharsiya, District Raigarh (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections SOURABH BHILWAR Digitally signed by SOURABH BHILWAR Date: 2026.08.20 18:05:42 +0530 2 20(b) and 29 of the NDPS Act. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the Police of Police Chowki-Jobi, Thana-Kharsia, Raigarh (C.G.), received secret information and, on the basis of the said information, conducted a raid, during which the police allegedly seized 64 kg 360 grams of contraband article (Ganja) from the possession of co-accused Anita Agariya. Based on her memorandum statement, co-accused Saraswati Agariya was apprehended, and in her memorandum statement, the said co-accused stated that the contraband was procured by her brother, namely, Manoj Sahu, who obtained it from one Lavlesh Pandey of Uttar Pradesh. Thereafter, the Police registered the aforesaid FIR for the offence punishable under Section 20(b) of the NDPS Act, against Anita Agariya, Saraswati Sahu, Manoj Sahu and Lavlesh Pandey. After investigation, on 09.12.2025, the applicant herein was arrested. 3. It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents and has been implicated solely on the basis of the memorandum statement of the co-accused, and that no contraband article has been recovered from his possession. He further submits that one of the co-accused, namely, Saraswati Sahu, has been granted bail on similar grounds by the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide order dated 08.07.2026 passed in SLP (Crl.) No. 6211/2026. Learned counsel 3 further submits that the applicant has been in custody since 09.12.2025, the charge-sheet has already been filed, and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. He, therefore, prays that the applicant be enlarged on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that considering the nature and gravity of the offence, the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents on record. 6. Considering the facts and circumstance of the case, nature and gravity of allegation made against the applicant and also considering that the applicant has been implicated merely on the basis of the memorandum statement of the co-accused and the fact that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court; and the applicant is in jail since 09.12.2025, and that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant – Lavlesh @ Ravindra Patel, involved in Crime No. 480/2025, registered at Police Chowki -Jobi, Thana Kharsiya, District Raigarh (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 20(b) and 29 of the NDPS Act, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the 4 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 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. 5 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 provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) Judge $. Bhilwar