1 / 5 CGHC010333262026 2026:CGHC:38277 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7988 of 2026 Shahid Ahmed S/o Abdul Majid Aged About 36 Years R/o 123, Sangam Nagar, Yashodhara Chowk, Near Mamu Kirana Store, Uppalwadi, Nagpur, Maharashtra. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through S. H. O., P. S. Kumhari, District- Durg, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent (Cause title taken from CIS) For Applicant : Mr. B.P. Singh, Advocate For State/Respondent : Mr. K.G. Yadav, Dy. Govt. Advocate (Hon’ble Shri Justice Bibhu Datta Guru) Order on Board 31/08/2026 1. This is the first bail application filed by the applicant under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in connection with Crime No. 172/2025 registered at Police Station Kumhari, District Durg (C.G.), for the offences SHOAIB ANWAR Digitally signed by SHOAIB ANWAR Date: 2026.08.31 17:37:55 +0530 2 / 5 punishable under Sections 20(b)(ii)(C), 25 and 27-A of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. 2. As per the prosecution case, on 07.09.2025, on receipt of information regarding transportation of contraband, the police intercepted a container vehicle and allegedly recovered approximately 388 kilograms of cannabis (ganja) therefrom. In connection with the said recovery, the co-accused Umesh Yadav was arrested and the contraband was seized. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the applicant was neither present at the spot nor was any contraband recovered from his conscious possession or at his instance. The applicant is not named in the First Information Report. It is further submitted that the vehicle/container from which the alleged contraband was recovered was not owned by the applicant and the implication of the applicant is primarily based upon the statement/memorandum of the co-accused Umesh Yadav. It is further submitted that the applicant has no previous criminal antecedent. Learned counsel for the applicant has also brought to the notice of this Court the order passed by the 3 / 5 Hon'ble Supreme Court of India on 17.08.2026 in SLP (Crl.) No. 11617/2026, arising out of MCRC No. 9676/2025, whereby the co-accused Md. Fayyaz @ Mohd. Fayyaz Mohd. Nizamuddin Ansari has been granted bail. It is submitted that the case of the present applicant stands on an equal or better footing and, therefore, the applicant is entitled to the benefit of parity. Therefore, the applicant may also be released on bail. 4. Per contra, learned State counsel has opposed the bail application. However, learned State counsel is also unable to dispute that the co-accused Md. Fayyaz has already been granted bail by the Supreme Court in the aforesaid proceedings. 5. I have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. 6. Having regard to the material available on record, the absence of recovery from the possession of the applicant, the fact that no recovery has been shown to have been made at his instance, the absence of criminal antecedents, and the subsequent order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court granting bail to the co-accused in the same crime, this Court is of the considered opinion that the applicant has made out a case for 4 / 5 grant of bail. Accordingly, the application is allowed. 7. Accordingly, the application is allowed. 7. It is directed that the applicant Shahid Ahmed S/o Abdul Majid, who is in custody in connection with Crime No. 172/2025 registered at Police Station Kumhari, District Durg (C.G.), shall be be released on bail on furnishing 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 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 5 / 5 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 provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. SSSd/-D/- SD/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) JUDGE Shoaib