SHUBHAM THAKUR vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

1

CGHC010333212026 2026:CGHC:38572
KUNAL
DEWANGAN
NAFR
Digitally
signed by
KUNAL
DEWANGAN
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 8039 of 2026
Shubham Thakur S/o Late Narendra Singh Thakur Aged About 23 Years
R/o Jawahar Nagar Ward, Bhetguda, Jagdalpur, P. S. Bodhghat, District
Bastar C. G.
... Applicant(s)
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station Bodhghat, District
Bastar C. G.
---- Non-Applicant(s)
: Mr. Pravin Kumar Tulsyan, Advocate.
For Applicant
For Non-Applicant : Ms. Palak Dwivedi, Panel Lawyer.
Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Order on Board
01/09/2026
1. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the default pointed
out by the Registry has been cured.
2. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the BNSS
for grant of regular bail to the applicant, who has been arrested in
connection with Crime No. 240/2026, registered at Police Station
Bodhghat, District Bastar (C.G.), for the offence punishable under
Section 21(b) of the NDPS Act.

2
3. As per the case of the prosecution in brief is that on 21.06.2026, the
police officials of Police Station Bodhghat, District Bastar (C.G.),
received secret information from the informant and acting upon
confidential information, conducted a search and allegedly
recovered 30 strips of “Pyeevon Spas Tramadol Plus HCL &
Acetaminophen Capsules” from the possession of the applicant.
Each strip contained 8 capsules and each capsule weighed 0.67
grams, having a total weight of 160.8 grams. Accordingly, the
aforesaid offence was registered against the applicant and after
completion of investigation, charge-sheet has been filed before the
competent Court.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has
been falsely implicated in the present case and has not committed
the alleged offence. It is further submitted that the applicant has no
previous criminal antecedents and the investigation has already
been completed and charge-sheet has been filed before the
competent Court. It is also submitted that the alleged quantity
attributable to the present applicant is below the commercial
quantity, however, the prosecution has prepared a common seizure
memo by clubbing the alleged quantity and has shown the same as
commercial quantity, which is seriously disputed and is a matter to
be considered during trial. Learned counsel submits that the
applicant is in custody since 21.06.2026 and the trial is likely to take
considerable time for its conclusion therefore, he prays for grant of
bail to the applicant.
5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for

3
grant of bail and submits that in the present case, charge-sheet has
been filed before the competent Court and the quantity of
contraband article which has been recovered from the possession
of the applicant, is less than commercial quantity moreover, the
applicant has a criminal antecedent under the IPC which has not
been explained in the bail application as such, he is not entitled for
grant of bail.
6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case
diary and other material available on record.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and
gravity of the offence levelled against the applicant, the period of
detention of the applicant since 21.06.2026 and further considering
the fact that the quantity of contraband article allegedly recovered
from the possession of the applicant is less than the commercial
quantity and the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case,
the applicant has only one criminal antecedent under the IPC and
the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, I am of the
considered view that the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail.
8. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed .
9. Let the Applicant- Shubham Thakur, involved in Crime No.
240/2026, registered at Police Station Bodhghat, District Bastar
(C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 21(b) of the NDPS
Act, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with
two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court
concerned with the following conditions:-

4
(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.
10. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial
Court concerned for necessary information.
Sd/-
(Ramesh Sinha)
Chief Justice
Kunal