Regular bail granted where no contraband was recovered from the applicant and the accompanied co-accused possessed non-commercial quantity.

On 25 February 2026, police at Police Station Kotwali, Raipur, allegedly seized 6.119 kg of ganja from co-accused Mukesh Gupta and 2,400 Alprazolam tablets weighing 360 grams from co-accused Sanju alias Sanjay Gupta.

The applicant, Nisar Khan, was implicated on the basis of the memorandum statement of co-accused Mukesh Gupta.

The applicant asserted that he was merely accompanying Mukesh Gupta in an auto-rickshaw as its driver and that no contraband was recovered from his possession.

He was arrested on 27 February 2026, and the charge-sheet was subsequently filed for offences under Sections 20(b), 22(c) and 29 of the NDPS Act.

The Court applied Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, governing the High Court’s power to grant regular bail.

The alleged offences were under Sections 20(b), 22(c) and 29 of the NDPS Act, concerning possession of cannabis, psychotropic substances and criminal conspiracy/abetment, respectively.

In assessing bail, the Court considered the nature of the allegations, the absence of recovery from the applicant, the quantity of contraband attributed to the co-accused accompanying him, the period of custody, filing of the charge-sheet and the likely duration of the trial.

The Court distinguished the applicant’s position from that of co-accused Sanju Gupta, whose bail application had been rejected because Alprazolam tablets had allegedly been recovered from him.

In contrast, no contraband was recovered from the applicant, and his implication was based principally on the memorandum statement of co-accused Mukesh Gupta.

The ganja allegedly recovered from Mukesh Gupta was below commercial quantity, and the applicant was stated to have merely accompanied him in his capacity as an auto-rickshaw driver.

Considering these circumstances, together with the applicant’s custody since 27 February 2026, absence of criminal antecedents, filing of the charge-sheet and the likelihood that the trial would take time, the Court found it appropriate to grant bail without expressing any opinion on the merits.

The applicant, Nisar Khan, was directed to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond with two local sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

The release was subject to conditions requiring him to avoid unnecessary adjournments, remain present before the trial Court, comply with proceedings concerning absence or non-appearance, and appear personally on the dates fixed for opening of the case, framing of charge and recording of his statement under Section 351 of the BNSS.