JAGBANDHU SONANI @ JATIN vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

1

CGHC010383352026 2026:CGHC:45583
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 9466 of 2026
1 - Jagbandhu Sonani @ Jatin S/o Trinath Sonani Aged About 30 Years
At Ward No. 6 Near Government School P.S. Kesinga, Distt- Kalahandi
Odisha
... Applicant
versus
1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through S H O, P.S. Kabir Nagar, Distt-
Raipur (C.G.)
... Non-applicant
For Applicant : Mr. Lukesh Kumar Mishra, Advocate
For Non-applicant
: Ms. Sameeksha Gupta, P.L.
/State
Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey
Order on Board
28/10/2026
1. The applicant has preferred this first bail application under
Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for

2
grant of regular bail as he has been arrested in connection with
Crime No. 60/2026 registered at Police Station Kabir Nagar,
District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section
20C of the NDPS Act.
2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 03/03/2026, police
apprehended co-accused Avinash Agrahari and seized a total
quantity of 28.621 kgs of ganja from him. Thereafter, his
memorandum statement was recorded wherein he disclosed that
the said contraband was purchased from the present applicant
who is a resident of Odisha. On that basis, police registered the
aforesaid offence against the present applicant.
3. Mr. Lukesh Kumar Mishra, learned counsel appearing for the
applicant, would argue that the contraband was seized from the
exclusive possession of co-accused Avinash Agrahari and the
present applicant was not even present at the place of the
incident. The name of the present applicant surfaced in the
memorandum statement of the co-accused and apart from that,
there is no material connecting the present applicant with the
offence in question. He would further contend that the charge-
sheet has already been filed, the applicant has no criminal
antecedents, the applicant has been in judicial custody since
24/03/2026 and since the conclusion of the trial is likely to take
considerable time, the applicant may be enlarged on regular bail.

3
4. On the other hand, Ms. Sameeksha Gupta, learned counsel
appearing for the non-applicant/State, would oppose the bail
application and submit that 28.621 kgs of contraband ganja was
seized from the co-accused Avinash Agrahari which is above
commercial quantity and thus, the rigours of Section 37 of the
NDPS Act would attract. She would pray for rejection of bail
application.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case
diary.
6. Having considered the fact that recovery of contraband was made
from the exclusive possession of co-accused Avinash Agrahari
and except for his memorandum statement, there is no material to
connect the applicant with the offence and further considering that
charge-sheet has already been filed, the applicant has no criminal
antecedent, he is in judicial custody since 23/03/2026, and the
conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, without
commenting on the merits of the matter, this Court is inclined to
enlarge the applicant on regular bail. Accordingly, the bail
application is allowed .
7. It is directed that in the event of the applicant executing a personal
bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety in the like sum to
the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court, he shall be released
on bail, on following conditions :-
(i) he shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement,

4
threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts
of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such
fact to the Court,
(ii) he shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial
to fair and expeditious trial, and
(iii) he shall appear before the trial Court on each and
every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of
the trial.
8. The observation made hereinabove is for the purpose of deciding
this bail application only, the trial Court shall decide the case on its
own merits.
Sd/-
(Rakesh Mohan Pandey)
JUDGE
Harneet