1 2026:CGHC:16970 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1704 of 2026 Suraj Singh S/o Yashwant Singh Aged About 28 Years R/o Muktipara, Atal Awas Ambikapur, P.S. Gandhinagar, Tehsil Ambikapur, District Sarguja C.G. (Details As Per Annexure A/1) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer (S.H.O.), P.S. Gandhinagar, District Sarguja C.G.(District Name Wrongly Mentioned In Annexure A/1) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Anurag Tiwary, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Sameeksha Gupta, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 13.04.2026 1. This is the Second 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. 133/2025 registered at Police Station Gandhinagar, District Sarguja (C.G.) for the offence under Section 22(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. 2. The first bail application of the applicant was rejected on merits by this Court in MCRC No. 4563 of 2025 vide order dated 16.04.2025. ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2026.04.15 10:54:36 +0530 2 3. prosecution story, in brief, is that on 22.02.2025, during patrolling near Banaras Road P.G. College, a bag was recovered from the possession of the primary accused, Prince Gupta, containing Rexogesic (Buprenorphine) Injection IP, 2 ml ampoules (100 units), Avil (Pheniramine Maleate) Injection IP, 10 ml vials (100 units), and Onerex Codeine Phosphate Cough Syrup, 100 ml bottles (totaling 1200 ml). The primary accused, Prince Gupta, in his memorandum statement, allegedly stated that the seized injections were purchased by him from the present applicant and another co-accused for personal use as well as for sale. 4. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicants that they have been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that the alleged contraband was not seized from the exclusive possession of the applicant. It is also submitted that a co-accused, namely Chetan Agrawal, has already been enlarged on bail by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP (Crl.) No. 17223/2025 vide order dated 12.12.2025. Therefore, it is prayed that the applicant be granted regular bail on the ground of parity. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State/non-applicant opposed the bail application but could not dispute the fact that the co- accused, namely, Chetan Agrawal, has already been granted bail by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and further taking into account that the first bail application of the applicant was rejected on merits by this Court in MCRC No. 4563 of 2025 vide order dated 16.04.2025, it is noted that a co-accused, namely Chetan Agrawal, has 3 already been enlarged on bail by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP (Crl.) No. 17223/2025 vide order dated 12.12.2025, the applicant has been in custody since 21.05.2025, conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time. In view of the prolonged custody of the applicant, this Court is of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in the present case. 8. Let the Applicant - Suraj Singh, involved in Crime No. 133/2025 registered at Police Station Gandhinagar, District Sarguja (C.G.) for the offence under Section 22(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, 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 appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate 4 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. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Abhishek