Chattisgarh High Court
Imran Khan @ Golu vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 19 March, 2026
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1
2026:CGHC:13270
Digitally
signed by
VAISHALI
NAFR
VAISHALI LUCKY
LUCKY NAGARIA
NAGARIA Date:
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
2026.03.19
18:00:52
+0530
MCRC No. 2274 of 2026
• Imran Khan @ Golu S/o Shiekh Hanif Khan Aged About 34 Years R/o
Risaipara Near Purav Kudumal Dharamshala, P.S. Kotwali, Distt.
Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh.
... Applicant(s)
versus
• State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer (S.H.O.), P.S.
Gobra Nawapara, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
... Respondent(s)
(Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Applicant(s) : Ms. Jyoti Roy, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 19.03.2026
1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 10/2026, registered at Police Station - Gobra-Nawapara, District - Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 21(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, for short, the NDPS Act.
2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that 07.01.2026, upon receiving secret information, the police conducted a raid at Dulna Tiraha and 2 apprehended the present applicant along with a co-accused, Purushottam Sahu. It is alleged that upon a personal search of the applicant, a plastic packet containing 5.68 grams of Heroin (Chitta) was found in his right-side pants pocket.
3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. It is submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed in this case. It is also submitted that alleged seizure contraband is 5.68 grams, which is only marginally higher than the small quantity (5 grams) and is significantly less than the commercial quantity (250 grams) as prescribed under the NDPS Act. It is further submitted that there are no any criminal antecedents of the applicant, and he is in jail since 07.01.2026 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, the learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case and there are no any criminal antecedents of the applicant. It is submitted that contraband article i.e. Heroin of 5.68 grams seized from the joint possession of the applicant and co- accused, which is only marginally higher than the small quantity (5 grams) and is significantly less than the commercial quantity (250 grams), therefore, this bail application is liable to be rejected.
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 as well as considering the quantity of contraband article i.e. 5.68 grams of Heroin seized from the joint possession of the applicant 3 and co-accused, which is only marginally higher than the small quantity (5 grams) and is significantly less than the commercial quantity (250 grams), also considering the fact that charge-sheet has been filed, and further that the applicant is in jail since 07.01.2026 and applicant has no criminal antecedent and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take sometime, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.
7. Let the applicant, Imran Khan @ Golu involved in Crime No. 10/2026, registered at Police Station - Gobra-Nawapara, District - Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 21(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, for short, the NDPS Act, be released on bail on their 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 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 4 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 Vaishali