1 2026:CGHC:15844 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3101 of 2026 Hukumat Sahu S/o Late Sajan Sahu Aged About 37 Years R/o Behind Marine Drive, Subhash Nagar, Devarpara, Police Station - Telibandha, District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through - Police Station - Arang, Tahsil- Raipur District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Ms. Ankita Goswami, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer. Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 07.04.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 0727/2025, registered at Police Station – Arang, District - Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 20(B) of the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and Sections 2(16[k), 9, 39(1)(?k)(3)(d] [k] x), 48([k)(1)(2), 50, 51 of the Wild Life (Protection), Act, 1972. 2. As per the prosecution story, on 20.12.2025, the police team of Police Station Arang, Raipur, received secret information from an informant that PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2026.04.08 10:49:56 +0530 2 a person was searching for customers to sell contraband (ganja). Acting on this information, the police team conducted a raid and seized 5 kg of contraband along with two monitor lizards (locally known as “Jangali Goh”). Based on the said seizure, a First Information Report was registered. 3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further contended that the prosecution has failed to comply with the mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act while lodging the FIR against the applicant. Learned counsel also submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed. Although the applicant has three previous criminal antecedents, he has been acquitted in all such cases, as explained in paragraph No. 4(A). It is further submitted that the applicant has been in judicial custody since 20.12.2025, and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take a considerable amount of time. In view of the aforesaid circumstances, it is prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to grant regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submits that a total quantity of alleged contraband substance which has been recovered from the possession of the applicant, is less than the commercial quantity. She further submits that the applicant has six previous criminal antecedents of the applicant, hence, he is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. After hearing the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and upon considering the material available on record, particularly 3 the fact that the quantity of the alleged contraband recovered from the possession of the applicant is less than the commercial quantity, the charge-sheet has already been filed, further the applicant has six previous criminal antecedents, out of which he has been acquitted in three cases, while the remaining cases are old and stale in nature, the applicant has been in judicial custody since 20.12.2025, and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, this Court is of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in the present case. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let applicant - Hukumat Sahu involved in Crime No. 0727/2025, registered at Police Station – Arang, District - Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 20(B) of the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and Sections 2(16[k), 9, 39(1)(?k)(3)(d] [k] x), 48([k)(1)(2), 50, 51 of the Wild Life (Protection), Act, 1972, be released on bail on his furnishing a 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 4 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 provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Preeti