PARAG BARCHHA vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

1

CGHC010325572026 2026:CGHC:38329
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 7852 of 2026
Parag Barchha S/o Late Bhavesh Barchha, Aged About 23 Years, R/o
Digitally
signed by
PREETI
KUMARI
Date:
2026.09.01
12:45:15
+0530
Kailashpuri Daga, Jwellers Ke Samne, Byas School Gali, Thana Purani Basti
PREETI
KUMARI
Raipur, District – Raipur, Chhattisgarh
... Applicant
versus
State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station New Rajendra Nagar, Raipur,
District – Raipur, Chhattisgarh
... Non-applicant
For Applicant : Mr. Vikas Kumar Pandey, Advocate.
For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Monika Thakur, Panel Lawyer.
Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice
Order on Board
31.08.2026
1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483
of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as
she has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 286/2025, registered
at Police Station – New Rajendra Nagar, Raipur, District – Raipur (C.G.)
for the offence punishable under Sections 21(b) and 29 of the Narcotic
Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, for short, the NDPS Act.
2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that, acting upon secret information
received from an informant, the police apprehended the co-accused and
registered Crime No. 286/2025 for the offences punishable under
Sections 21(b) and 29 of the NDPS Act. It is further alleged that, on the

2
basis of the memorandum statement of the co-accused, the present
applicant was implicated in the case, and 3.160 grams of brown sugar
was seized from his possession.
3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the
applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case.
It is further submitted that the said brown sugar has not been seized from
the possession of the present applicant. He also submits that only on the
basis of memorandum of co-accused person, the present applicant has
been implicated in this case. It is further submitted that co-accused
persons have already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated
13.07.2026 passed in MCRC Nos. 2471/2026, 4622/2026, 2630/2026
and 3372/2026. It is also submitted that the charge-sheet has already
been filed, there is one previous criminal antecedent against the applicant
under the Arms Act, and he has been in judicial custody since
23.12.2025. The conclusion of the trial is likely to take a considerable
period of time. Therefore, learned counsel prays that the applicant be
enlarged on regular bail.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail
application and submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed.
She, however, could not dispute the fact that the co-accused persons
have already been granted bail by this Court. Learned State counsel
further submits that the applicant has one previous criminal antecedent
under the Arms Act.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material
available on record.
6. After hearing the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the

3
parties as well as considering the quantity of alleged contraband
substance which has been recovered from the possession of the
applicant, is less than the commercial quantity, also considering the fact
that co-accused persons have already been granted bail by this Court
vide order dated 13.07.2026 passed in MCRC Nos. 2471/2026,
4622/2026, 2630/2026 and 3372/2026, the charge-sheet has been filed
and there is one previous criminal antecedent under the Arms Act, further,
that the applicant is in jail since 23.12.2025 and the conclusion of the trial
is likely to take sometime, this Court is of the opinion that the applicant is
entitled to be released on bail in this case.
7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed . Let applicant -
Parag Barchha involved in Crime No. 286/2025, registered at Police
Station – New Rajendra Nagar, Raipur, District – Raipur (C.G.) for the
offence punishable under Sections 21(b) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs
and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, for short, the NDPS Act, be
released on bail on her furnishing a 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 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
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
Section 269 of
(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail

4
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
Preeti