Chattisgarh High Court
Birendra @ Bira Pardhi vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 10 March, 2026
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1
2026:CGHC:11440
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 2259 of 2026
Birendra @ Bira Pardhi S/o Late Jagdish Pardhi Aged About 25 Years R/o
Power House, Indu Technical, Tea Market, Near Usha Grocery Shop, Police
VAIBHAV
SINGH Station Chhawani, District - Durg, Chhattisgarh. ...Applicant
Digitally signed
by VAIBHAV
SINGH
Date: 2026.03.11
10:37:41 +0530
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Durg Kotwali, District - Durg,
Chhattisgarh. ...Non-applicant
For Applicant : Mr. Vinamra Shrivastava, Advocate.
For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Palak Dwivedi, learned Panel Lawyer.
Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Order on Board
10.03.2026
1.This is the first 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. 172/2025 registered at Police Station - Durg Kotwali District - Durg (C.G.) for the offence under Section 21(a) & 27(a) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act 1985 and Section 111(2) of the BNS.
2
2. The prosecution story in brief, is that, on 22.04.2025 the officers of Police Station City Kotwali, Durg allegedly received secret information and, acting upon the same, apprehended the present applicant along with other co-accused persons, namely Vishal Singh and Atul Kumar, near Shivnath River on Mahamara Road, Durg. During the search, the police allegedly recovered and seized 14.44 grams of a substance described as "Chitta (Heroin)" along with some cash amount from the possession of the present applicant. The police also seized 46.05 grams and 13.85 grams of brown sugar from the possession of the other co-accused persons respectively. Consequently, in the present crime, a total of 76.34 grams of brown sugar is alleged to have been seized from the joint possession of the accused persons.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case and there is no material collected by the prosecution to connect the applicant with the commission of the alleged offence. It is further submitted that the police of Police Station City Kotwali, Durg has not followed the mandatory procedures prescribed under the NDPS Act during the course of investigation. Learned counsel contends that even if the prosecution case is accepted as it stands, the quantity of contraband allegedly seized from the applicant is 14.44 grams of heroin, which falls under intermediate quantity, i.e., more than small quantity but less than commercial quantity (commercial quantity being 250 grams), and therefore the rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act are not attracted in the present case. It is also submitted that the charge-sheet has already been filed and no further custodial interrogation of the applicant is required. Learned counsel further 3 submits that the applicant has already remained in custody for more than 10 months and the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude; therefore, continued detention of the applicant would be unjustified and would infringe his rights guaranteed under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India. It is lastly submitted that similarly placed co-accused persons have already been enlarged on bail by this Hon'ble Court and on the ground of parity also the present applicant deserves to be released on bail.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State/non- applicant would opposes the bail application and submit that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court.
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, it is noted that the contraband article, i.e., 76.34 grams of brown sugar, was allegedly recovered from the joint possession of the applicant and the co-accused, which is less than the commercial quantity, and that the applicant has no criminal antecedents. Further, considering the fact that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court, the applicant has been in custody since 22.04.2025, and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time, this Court is of the considered view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in the present case.
7. Let the Applicant - Birendra @ Bira Pardhi involved in Crime No. 172/2025 registered at Police Station - Durg Kotwali District - Durg 4 (C.G.) for the offence under Section 21(a) & 27(a) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act 1985 and Section 111(2) of the BNS, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two local 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 she 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 her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against his 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 proceedings against her, 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 5 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 send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance.
- Sd/-
(Ramesh Sinha)
Chief Justice
vaibhav