Chhattisgarh HC Grants Bail To Man In 303.79g Heroin Case, Noting He Was Implicated Only By Co-Accused’s Statement

In brief

The question

1. Whether the applicant should be granted regular bail where he was implicated solely on the basis of a co-accused’s memorandum statement and no seizure was made from him.

The court held

The Court allowed the application and directed that the applicant be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond of ₹50,000 to the satisfaction of the trial Court, subject to conditions requiring availability for police interrogation when required, non-interference with witnesses, and conduct not prejudicial to a fair and expeditious trial.

It also directed

The Court clarified that its observations were confined to the bail application and that the trial Court must decide the case on its own merits.

01Facts

Police alleged that, on 28 November 2025, they recovered heroin totalling 303.79 grams, two mobile phones and an electronic weighing scale from co-accused Kamlesh Arora @ Lali.

¶ 1

The applicant was implicated on the basis of the co-accused’s memorandum statement; no contraband was seized from the applicant.

¶ 1–4

He was arrested in this case on 9 May 2026.

¶ 1–4

The charge-sheet had been filed, and the applicant had one pending criminal antecedent in Crime No. 261/2026, in which he had been granted bail.

¶ 1–4

He sought regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, citing his custody and the likely delay in conclusion of trial.

¶ 1–4

02Issues

i.1. Whether the applicant should be granted regular bail where he was implicated solely on the basis of a co-accused’s memorandum statement and no seizure was made from him.

¶ 3–6

ii.2. Whether the filing of the charge-sheet, the applicant’s period in custody, the likely duration of trial, and his criminal antecedent supported release on bail.

¶ 3–6

03Law Applied

The application was made under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, which the Court applied as the basis for considering regular bail.

¶ 1

The prosecution offences were alleged under Sections 21(B), 21(C) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, and Section 111 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

¶ 1

In assessing bail, the Court considered the circumstances identified in its order: the basis for the applicant’s implication, the absence of a seizure from him, the filing of the charge-sheet, custody, the expected duration of trial, and the status of his antecedent case.

¶ 6

The order does not cite any precedent or set out a separate statutory test.

¶ 6

Provisions in the judgment · 4 · Linked ones open on LawLens

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 483

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 Section 21 Section 29

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 111

04Reasoning

The Court noted that the heroin and related items were recovered from the co-accused, while the applicant was implicated solely through the co-accused’s memorandum statement and no seizure was made from the applicant.

¶ 6

It also took account of the fact that the charge-sheet had been filed, the applicant had been in custody since 9 May 2026, and trial was likely to take time.

¶ 6

Although the applicant had a criminal antecedent, he had already been granted bail in that case by a coordinate Bench.

¶ 6

On these circumstances, the Court found him entitled to bail.

¶ 6