[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Chattisgarh High Court
Smt. Mumtaj Khan vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 21 April, 2026
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1
2026:CGHC:18189
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 2128 of 2026
Smt. Mumtaj Khan W/o Sameer Khan Aged About 42 Years R/o Daihan
Para, Korba, District- Korba (C.G.) ... Applicant
VAIBHAV
SINGH versus
Digitally signed by
VAIBHAV SINGH
Date: 2026.04.22
10:59:53 +0530
State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The Station House Officer Police Station
Baloda District- Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Non-applicant
For Applicant : Mr. Ajay Kumar Chandra, Advocate.
For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Monika Thakur, Panel Lawyer.
Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Order on Board
21.04.2026
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
applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.
10/2026, registered at Police Station - Baloda District- Mahasamund
(C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 20(B) of the NDPS
Act.
2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 30-01-2026, the police
has received secrete information that two persons are coming from
the Odisha Side in the black coloured motorcycle bearing registration
Number CG-12/BU-7253 and kept some illegal contraband material.
On the basis said information, conducted the raid at Forest Naka
Sirpur and stopped the above mentioned vehicle, where the present
applicant and one another accused persons were travelling in the said
vehicle. During the search, the police recovered total 09 Kg
Contraband Ganja from the joint possession of the accused persons.
Theserver of the police department is not available now therefore the
applicant is not filed the copy of FIR with this bail application.
3. The applicant respectfully submits that he is innocent and has been
falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that in the
present crime and has neither committed nor participated in any
alleged offence. The essential ingredients of the offences alleged are
not prima facie attracted against the applicant. It is further submitted
that a false seizure memo has been prepared by the police in order to
falsely implicate the applicant in the present case, and he is confident
that he will ultimately be acquitted of the charges. The applicant has
been in judicial custody since 30.01.2026, and the trial is likely to take
a considerable time to conclude; therefore, in view of his prolonged
detention, this Hon'ble Court may kindly consider granting him regular
bail. The applicant reserves his right to raise additional grounds at the
time of hearing. He is a permanent resident of the address mentioned
in the cause title, and there is no likelihood of his absconding.
4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail
application of the applicant.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case-
diary.
6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case,
nature and gravity of offence levelled against the applicant and the
fact that the applicant has no previous antecedents and also
considering the fact that the charge-sheet has been filed and he has
been in jail since 30.01.2026 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take
some time, therefore, I am inclined to grant regular bail to the present
applicant.
7. Let applicant, Smt. Mumtaj Khan, involved in Crime No. 10/2026,
registered at Police Station - Baloda District - Mahasamund (C.G.) for
the offence punishable under Section 20(B) of the NDPS Act, 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 her 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
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 her 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
vaibhav
