1 CGHC010336982026 2026:CGHC:42706 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8129 of 2026 Baikuntha (Rahul) Soni S/o Madhusudan Soni Aged About 21 Years R/o Village Jhitki, P. S. And Tehsil Paikmal District Nuapada, (Orrisa). ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Police Station Komakhan, District Mahasamund C. G. ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Shri Sandeep Patel appears on behalf of Shri Shubhank Tiwari, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Shri Sourabh Sahu, Panel Lawyer (HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAKESH MOHAN PANDEY) Order on Board 01/10/2026 1. This is the irst 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. 82/2026 registered at Police Station Komakhan District - Mahasamund (C.G.) for the ofence under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that upon receiving secret information regarding transportation of Ganja, the police conducted a raid and intercepted a motorcycle. At the time of interception, co- accused Ayush Upadhyay was riding the motorcycle and the co- accused, namely Satyam Tiwari, was sitting as a pillion rider. Upon Digitally signed by ALLENA ANJANI KUMAR Date: 2026.10.01 17:32:19 +0530 2 checking the said motorcycle, 10 kg and 140 grams of Ganja was allegedly recovered. During the course of investigation, on the basis of the memorandum statement, the present applicant Baikunth Soni was also implicated in the case on the allegation that he had sold the contraband to the present applicant and co-accused Ayush Upadhyay. Consequently, Crime No. 82/2026 was registered at Police Station Komakhan, District- Mahasamund (C.G.) and the matter was taken up for investigation. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case and there is no direct evidence against the present applicant. He would further submit that prosecution agency has not followed the provisions under Section 42 of the NDPS Act and not taken search warrant from the superior authority. He would also submit that from the joint possession of the present applicant along with co-accused, intermediate quantity of the psychotropic substance ganja has been seized, and therefore, it will not attract the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act as the commercial quantity of ganja as prescribed under the schedule is more than 20 kgs and from the joint possession of the applicant along with co-accused 10 Kg. 140 grams of Ganja has been seized. He would later submit that the applicant has no criminal antecedent and he is in jail since 29.05.2026 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State/non- applicant would oppose the bail application and submit that the charge- sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court and also endorse the said submission that the applicant has no 3 criminal antecedent and further the quantity of contraband article which has been recovered from the joint possession of the applicant along with co-accused, is less than commercial quantity. However, looking to the seriousness of this case, the present applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 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 that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court and the applicant has no criminal antecedent and further the quantity of contraband article seized from the joint possession of the applicant along with co-accused, is less than commercial quantity and the applicant is in jail since 29.05.2026 and conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. Accordingly, the application is allowed. Accordingly, the application is allowed. 7. Let the Applicant 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) he shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such fact to the Court; (ii) he shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial, & (iii) he shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE Anjani