[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Chattisgarh High Court
Vikash Yadav vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 25 March, 2026
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1
2026:CGHC:14391
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 2258 of 2026
Vikash Yadav S/o Harishchand Yadav Aged About 20 Years R/o Village-
Ganiyari, Police Station- Kota, Tahsil- Ganiyari, District- Bilaspur (C.G.)
... Applicant
versus
State of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer, Police Station-
Bilaigarh, District- Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.)
... Non-applicant
For Applicant : Ms. Minakshi Gupta, Advocate
For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Palak Dwivedi, Panel Lawyer
Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Order on Board
25.03.2026
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.
319/2025 registered at Police Station Bilaigarh, District- Sarangarh-
Bilaigarh, (C.G.) for the offence under Section 20(B) of the Narcotic
Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.
2. Case of the prosecution, in brief is that the police of Police Station
RAHUL Bilaigarh, District- Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.), received a secret
DEWANGAN
Digitally information from the informant and on the said information police
signed by
RAHUL
DEWANGAN
conducted a raid and seized 4.994 Kgs of cannabis from the joint
possession of the present applicant and co-accused. Thereafter,
offence punishable under Section 20(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and
Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 has been registered against
present applicant.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant
is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. She
further submits that the said contraband article was not seized from
the possession of the present applicant and other co-accused
person. She also submits that prosecution agency has not followed
the provisions under Section 42 of the NDPS Act. She further
submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedents, the charge-
sheet has been submitted before the competent Court, and he is in
jail since 10.12.2025 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take
quite long time. Therefore, she prays for grant of regular bail to the
applicant.
4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail
application of the present applicant and submits that the charge-
sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court
and also endorse the submission made by the learned counsel for
the applicant. She further submits that from the joint possession of
the present applicant and other co-accused the contraband article
i.e. 4.994 kg cannabis was seized, therefore, the present applicant
is not entitled for grant of bail.
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. 4.994 kg cannabis was seized form
the joint possession of the present applicant and other co-accused,
is less than commercial quantity and further the fact that the present
applicant has no criminal antecedents, in the present bail
application the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent
Court and he is in jail since 10.12.2025 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 - Vikash Yadav, involved in Crime No. 319/2025
registered at Police Station Bilaigarh, District- Sarangarh-Bilaigarh,
(C.G.) for the offence under Section 20(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and
Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, 1985, be released on bail 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
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
