Chhattisgarh High Court
MCRC/9080/2026 of JHASKUMAR SAHU Vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH on 11 October 2026
2026:CGHC:44111 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9080 of 2026 1 - Jhaskumar Sahu S/o Miniketan Sahu, Aged About 20 Years R/o Village Jampali, P.S. Jharband, District Bargarh (Odisha) 2 - Nilsagar, S/o Basant Sahu, Aged About 31 Years R/o Village Jampali, P.S.
CGHC010369602026
2026:CGHC:44111
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 9080 of 2026
1 - Jhaskumar Sahu S/o Miniketan Sahu, Aged About 20 Years R/o Village Jampali, P.S.
Jharband,
District
Bargarh
(Odisha)
2 - Nilsagar, S/o Basant Sahu, Aged About 31 Years R/o Village Jampali, P.S.
Jharband, District Bargarh (Odisha)
... Petitioner(s)
versus
1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer Police Station Sankra District Mahasamund (C.G.)
... Respondent(s)
For Applicant/s
: Shri Sudhir Kumar Sahu, Advocate.
For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Laxmin Kashyap, P.L.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 12.10.2026
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1) This is the first bail application filed under under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicants, who have been arrested in connection with Crime No.134 of 2026 registered at Police Station Sankra, District Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh for the offence punishable under Section 20(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.
2) Case of the prosecution, in brief is that the police of Police Station NIRMALA RAO
Sankra, District Mahasamund, received a secret information from the informant and on the said information conducted a raid and seized 7.200 kg of contraband Ganja from the possession of the applicants, thereafter, the aforesaid offence was registered against the applicants.
3) It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that from the possession of the applicants small quantity of Ganja was seized, and therefore, it will not attract the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act as the commercial quantity of Ganja as prescribed under the schedule is more than 20 Kgs and from the possession of the applicants 7.200 kg of Ganja was seized. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants have no criminal antecedents and they are in jail since 27.7.2026 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicants.
4) On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State/non- applicants would oppose the bail application and submit that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the Competent Court and also endorse the said submission that the applicants have no criminal antecedents. She further submits that 7.200 kg of ganja was seized from the possession of the applicants. Therefore, the applicants are not entitled to the grant of bail.
5) I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary.
6) Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case that 7.200 kg of Ganja was recovered from the possession of the applicants, which is less than commercial quantity. Moreover, the present applicants have no criminal antecedents. Also considering the fact that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court and the applicants are in jail since 27.7.2026, conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this case.
7) Accordingly, the bail application filed by applicants is allowed and it is directed that in the event of the applicants executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety each to the satisfaction of the concerned Trial Court, they shall be released on bail, on following conditions :-
(i) they shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such fact to the Court,
(ii) they shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial, and
(iii) they shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to them by the said Court till disposal of the trial,
(iv) they shall not involve themselves in any offence of similar nature in future. The observations made in the course of this order are only for considering the case of the applicants on the application for grant of regular bail. The concerned trial Court shall not be influenced or bound by the observations made in the course of this order. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Nimmi