Chattisgarh High Court
Satyam Chandrakar vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 23 March, 2026
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1
2026:CGHC:13802
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 2701 of 2026
Satyam Chandrakar S/o Dilip Chandrakar Aged About 28 Years R/o-
Sunder Nagar, Raipur District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
... Applicant
versus
State of Chhattisgarh Through- Police Station- Kabir Nagar, District-
Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
... Non-applicant
For Applicant : Mr. Virendra Kashyap, Advocate
For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Shailendra Sharma, Panel Lawyer
Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Order on Board
23.03.2026
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. 261/2025 registered at Police Station Kabir Nagar, District- Raipur (C.G.) for the offence under Sections 21(b), 27(a) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.
2. Case of the prosecution, in brief is that on 27.12.2025, acting on the basis of secret information, the police conducted a raid at House RAHUL No. 01, LIG Phase-I, belonging to co-accused Harpreet Kaur, from DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 where 16.1 grams of heroin (chitta) was allegedly recovered from a drawer of a bed, during the course of investigation, co-accused Harpreet Kaur, in her memorandum statement, allegedly disclosed that the said contraband had been brought by her husband, co- accused Jodha Singh, from Punjab, and thereafter co-accused Jodha Singh, in his memorandum statement, allegedly stated that he had procured the contraband from co-accused Sukhraj Singh of Bhilai and had sold the same along with the present applicant, Satyam Chandrakar, it is further alleged that 7.12 grams of chitta was seized from co-accused Sukhraj Singh and that the present applicant had allegedly consumed narcotic substances, and on the basis of the aforesaid allegations, the present bail application has been filed.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the said contraband article was not seized from the possession of the present applicant. He also submits that prosecution agency has not followed the provisions under Section 42 of the NDPS Act. He further submits that co-accused persons, namely, Harpreet Kaur and Jodha Singh have already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 19.03.2026 in MCRC No. 2583/2026. He also submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and he is in jail since 18.02.2026 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant on the ground of parity. 3
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application of the applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court, but could not dispute the fact that co-accused persons have already been granted bail by this 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 that in the present bail application the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court, the said contraband article was not recovered form the exclusive possession of the applicant the contraband article i.e. 16.01 grams of heroin (chitta) recovered from the drawer of a bed in possession of the co-accused, Harpreet Kaur, is less than the commercial quantity, and further the co- accused persons, namely, Harpreet Kaur and Jodha Singh have already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 19.03.2026 in MCRC No. 2583/2026, and the applicant has no criminal antecedents and he is in jail since 18.02.2026 and conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.
7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the Applicant - Satyam Chandrakar, involved in Crime No. 261/2025 registered at Police Station Kabir Nagar, District- Raipur (C.G.) for the offence under Sections 21(b), 27(a) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, be released on bail 4 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 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 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 forthwith.
Sd/-
(Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan