Regular bail granted where prosecution relied solely on a co-accused’s memorandum without recovery from the applicant.

The applicant filed his first application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking regular bail in Crime No. 4/2026 registered at Police Station GRP Raigarh for offences under Sections 20(b) and 29 of the NDPS Act.

The prosecution alleged that, acting on secret information, the police raided the Utkal passenger train and recovered 3.080 kg of ganja from co-accused Bharat Thakur. The applicant was implicated pursuant to the memorandum statement of the co-accused, and no contraband was recovered from him.

The applicant contended that he was falsely implicated, had been in custody since 10 April 2026, and that the co-accused had already been granted bail by the High Court in MCRC No. 3976 of 2026.

The State opposed bail, submitting that the applicant had one criminal antecedent under Section 498-A of the IPC and that the charge-sheet had been filed.

Whether the applicant was entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in a prosecution under Sections 20(b) and 29 of the NDPS Act.

Whether the absence of recovery from the applicant, his implication through the co-accused’s memorandum statement, the grant of bail to the co-accused, the filing of the charge-sheet, and the period of custody justified release on bail.

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

The prosecution invoked Sections 20(b) and 29 of the NDPS Act, concerning unlawful possession of cannabis and criminal conspiracy or abetment relating to an NDPS offence.

In exercising its discretionary bail jurisdiction, the Court considered the completion of investigation and filing of the charge-sheet, the period of incarceration, the likelihood of delay in conclusion of trial, the applicant’s criminal antecedents, and parity with the co-accused already enlarged on bail.

No separate judicial precedent was relied upon in the order.

The Court found that the charge-sheet had already been submitted, reducing the need for continued custodial interrogation.

It also considered that the alleged recovery of 3.080 kg of ganja was from the co-accused and that the applicant had been implicated primarily through the co-accused’s memorandum statement, with no contraband recovered from him.

The applicant’s custody since 10 April 2026, the co-accused’s release on bail, and the likelihood that the trial would take time weighed in favour of bail.

Although the applicant had one antecedent under Section 498-A IPC, the Court considered it insufficient, in the circumstances, to deny bail.

The High Court directed that Tankadhar Bibhar be released in Crime No. 4/2026 upon furnishing a personal bond with two local sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned trial court.

The release was subject to conditions requiring him not to seek unnecessary adjournments when witnesses were present, to remain present before the trial court, to comply with proceedings arising from non-appearance or misuse of bail, and to 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.