1 2026:CGHC:8088 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 10526 of 2025 Nilesh Verma S/o Santosh Verma Aged About 19 Years R/o Village Ganiyari, Ps Kota, District Bilaspur C.G. ---Applicant versus The State Of Chhattisgarh Through SHO P.S Singhoda, District Mahasamund C.G. ... Non-Applicant (Cause Title taken from Case Information System) For Applicant : Mr. Praveen Soni along with Mr. Suraj Kumar Aadheliya, Advocates. For State/ Non-Applicant : Mr. Shubham Bajpai, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 13.02.2026 1. This is the ,rst bail application ,led under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 87/2025 registered at Police Station-Singhoda, District- Mahasamund (C.G.) under Section 20(b) (ii) (B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 07.11.2025 the Police of Police Station Singhoda, District- Mahasamund has received secret information from the informant that the driver of a black coloured Honda motorcycle without registration number, coming from Odisha towards Digitally signed by RAVVA UTTEJ KUMAR RAJU 2 Chhattisgarh, he was intercepted, apprehended on the basis of suspicion and interrogated by the officers of P.S. Singhoda and then they have recovered 5.00 kg of ganja from the possession of the applicant. Thereafter, the case has been registered against the present applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case and the contraband Ganja was not seized from the exclusive possession of the applicant. He further submits that 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 also submits that from the possession of the applicant 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 possession of the applicant only 05.00 kg Ganja has been seized. He later submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedent and he is in jail since 07.11.2025 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 ,led in the present case before the competent Court and also endorse the said submission that the applicant has three criminal antecedents of IPC. He further submits that from the possession of the applicant contraband article i.e. 05.00 kg of Ganja is seized, therefore, the present applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 3 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 and the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedent under the NDPS Act and the contraband article i.e. 05.00 kg Ganja recovered from the possession of the applicant is less than the commercial quantity and the charge-sheet has been ,led in the present case before the competent Court, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the Applicant – Nilesh Verma involved in Crime No. 87/2025 registered at Police Station- Singhoda, District- Mahasamund (C.G.) under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, be released on bail on his 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 ,le an undertaking to the e?ect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates ,xed 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 ,xed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without su@cient 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 ,xed 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 ,xed 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 4 without su@cient 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. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall make an earnest endeavour to conclude the trial in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible, within a period of six months from today, if there is no legal impediment. 9. O@ce is directed to send a certi,ed copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - d/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice U.K. Raju