Facts
The applicant was arrested on August 5, 2025, in connection with Crime No. 240/2025 at P.S. Fingeshwar for allegedly possessing and transporting 120 tablets of "Nitrosun," a prohibited narcotic substance.
Source reference: para. 3The applicant filed a second bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023.
Source reference: para. 1His first bail application (MCRC No. 9601/2025) was rejected on January 5, 2026, primarily due to a previous criminal antecedent under the NDPS Act.
Source reference: para. 2, 4The applicant contended that he has since been acquitted in the previous case, has been in custody for nearly a year, and only one out of nine witnesses has been examined.
Source reference: para. 4Issues
1. Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail considering the change in circumstances regarding his criminal antecedents and the prolonged period of incarceration.
Source reference: para. 7Law Applied
Section 22(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, which pertains to the contravention involving psychotropic substances.
Source reference: para. 3Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023.
Source reference: para. 1Sections 209, 269, and 351 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and Section 84 of the BNSS regarding the conditions of bail and consequences of non-compliance.
Source reference: para. 8Reasoning
The Court evaluated the merit of the second bail application by noting a significant change in circumstances: the previous criminal antecedent that led to the initial rejection of bail was no longer a valid ground for detention, as the applicant had been acquitted in that matter.
Source reference: para. 4, 5, 7Furthermore, the court observed that the applicant had been languishing in jail since August 5, 2025, and the trial was progressing slowly, with only one witness examined out of nine.
Source reference: para. 4, 7By weighing the period of incarceration against the status of the trial and the removal of the previous adverse antecedent, the court determined that continued detention was unnecessary.
Source reference: para. 7Holding
The court held that the acquittal in the previous case and the duration of custody outweighed the initial grounds for rejection.
The High Court allowed the second bail application, granting the applicant release on bail subject to furnishing a personal bond and two sureties.
Source reference: para. 8The holding was conditioned upon strict requirements, including the applicant's mandatory presence at trial, a prohibition on seeking unnecessary adjournments, and penalties for misuse of liberty under relevant provisions of the BNS and BNSS.
Source reference: para. 8Original Court PDF
NITESH @ MONTI THAKURvsSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in