[Cites 4, Cited by 0]
Chattisgarh High Court
Gajendra Kumar Khatri vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 13 April, 2026
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1
2026:CGHC:16965
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Digitally signed MCRC No. 1793 of 2026
by ABHISHEK
SHRIVAS
ABHISHEK
Date:
SHRIVAS 2026.04.15
10:54:36 1. Gajendra Kumar Khatri S/o Tejmal Khatri Aged About 38 Years R/o 82,
+0530
Gujron Ka Mohalla, Near Jhulelal Mandir, Sanganer, P.S. Sanganer,
District Jaipur (Rajasthan), At Present R/o Near Shridhar Tent House,
Nahar Road, Lormi, P.S. Lormi, District Mungeli (C.G.)
2. Neeraj @ Montu S/o Manikdas Manikpuri Aged About 24 Years R/o
Gurudwara Chowk, Bus Stand Ramhepur, Lormi, P.S. Lormi, District
Mungeli (C.G.)
3. Mangluram Sahu S/o Chhotelal Sahu Aged About 32 Years R/o Dindoul,
P.S. Lormi, District Mungeli (C.G.)
4. Smt. Saraswati Sahu W/o Mangluram Sahu Aged About 30 Years R/o
Dindoul, P.S. Lormi, District Mungeli (C.G.)
... Applicants
versus
State of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Kota, District Bilaspur (C.G.)
... Non-applicant
For Applicants : Mr. Keshav Dewangan, Advocate.
For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Sourabh Sahu, Panel Lawyer.
Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Order on Board
13.04.2026
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 applicants
who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 52/2026 registered
at Police Station Kota, District Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence under
Sections 20(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act,
1985.
2. As per the prosecution story, on 22.01.2026, upon receipt of secret
information, the police personnel of Outpost Belgahna intercepted the
applicants, who were riding on two different motorcycles. Upon search,
10 kg of ganja was allegedly recovered from applicant No. 1, Gajendra
Kumar Khatri, and 3 kg of ganja was recovered from Applicant No. 4.
Applicant Nos. 2 and 3 were arrested on the ground that applicant Nos. 1
and 4 were travelling as pillion riders on the motorcycles driven by them.
It is alleged that the applicants were carriers of the contraband, and since
they could not produce any valid authorization for possessing the same,
they were arrested.
3. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicants that the
applicants have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits
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 applicants
intermediate quantity of Ganja was 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 applicants 10 Kgs and 3 kgs of Ganja
was seized. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the
applicants that the applicants have no criminal antecedents under the
NDPS Act and they are in jail since 22.01.2026 and conclusion of the trial
is likely to take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular
bail to the applicants.
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 filed in the present case before the competent Court and also
endorse the said submission that the applicants have no criminal
antecedents under the NDPS Act.
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
the contraband article i.e. 13 Kgs of Ganja was recovered from the joint
possession of the applicants, which is less than commercial quantity.
Moreover, the present applicants have no criminal antecedents under the
NDPS Act. Also considering the fact that the charge-sheet has been filed
in the present case before the competent Court and the applicants are in
jail since 22.01.2026, conclusion of the trial may take some time,
therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicants are entitled to be
released on bail in this case.
7. Let the Applicants - Gajendra Kumar Khatri, Neeraj @ Montu,
Mangluram Sahu and Smt. Saraswati Sahu, involved in Crime No.
52/2026 registered at Police Station Kota, District Bilaspur (C.G.) for the
offence under Sections 20(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic
Substances Act, 1985, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond
with two local sureties each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the
Court concerned with the following conditions:-
(i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect
that they 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 applicants shall remain present before the trial
court on each date fixed, either personally or through their
counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause,
the trial court may proceed against them under Section
269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
(iii) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during
trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation
under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicants
fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such
proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate
proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under
Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
(iv) The applicants 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 applicants are 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 them in accordance with law.
8. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall make an
earnest endeavour to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible
within a period of six months from the receipt of a certified copy of this
order in accordance with law, if there is no legal impediment.
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
