Allowed

Devendra Sharma v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC14 Sept 2026MCRC/7248/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Single Judge Bench allowed the bail application of an applicant arrested for narcotics offences under Section 438 BNSS/483 BNSS. The court granted bail due to parity with co-accused, hostilisation of a prosecution witness, and lack of antecedents.

What did the court decide?

Regular bail granted conditioned on execution of personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with one surety and appearing in court.

Devendra Sharma Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Narcotics (NDPS) | Chhattisgarh HC (2026)

CGHC010299812026

2026:CGHC:40192

NAFR

KUNAL DEWANGAN

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶7

Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN

¶8

MCRC No. 7248 of 2026

¶9

Devendra Sharma S/o Ishwar Sharma Aged About 39 Years R/o Village Kaylagaon, Police Station And District Bhiwani ( Haryana)

¶10

... Applicant(s)

¶11

versus

¶12

State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Officer, City Kotwali, Sarangarh, District Sarangarh, Bilaigarh C.G.

¶13

... Non-Applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Pawan Kumar Kesharwani, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Kanwaljeet Singh Saini, Dy. G.A.

¶14

Hon'ble Shri, Rakesh Mohan Pandey, Judge

¶15

Order on Board

¶16

15/09/2026

¶17

1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for grant of regular bail to the applicant, who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 0437/2025 registered at Police Station Sarangarh, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 20(b)(ii)(C) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

¶18

2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 28.08.2025, during night patrolling and vehicle checking near Village Dansara Bypass, the

¶19

¶20

police noticed one car and one truck container, which did not stop and were chased up to Nandeli Bypass Road near MRS Rice Mill. Upon checking the said vehicles, five persons, namely, Devendra Sharma (present applicant), Shyam Babu, Ranjit Sahu, Narayan Prasad Sahu and Smt. Sanjana Sahu, were found present. On search of truck bearing registration No. HR46 E-2249, a total of 29 packets containing 91.320 kilograms of ganja, allegedly kept behind the driver's seat and wrapped in khaki-coloured plastic tape, were recovered and seized. Accordingly, the aforesaid offence was registered and after completion of investigation, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court.

¶21

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He would further submits that the applicant was not found in exclusive or conscious possession of the alleged contraband and there is no independent material showing his ownership, control or dominion over the seized contraband. He would further contend that the investigation has been completed and charge-sheet has been filed and the applicant is in judicial custody since 28.08.2025. It is also submitted that the similarly situated co-accused, namely Shyam Babu Choudhary, whose bail application was rejected by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in MCRC No. 3982/2026 vide order dated 30.04.2026, preferred SLP (Crl.) No. 9672/2026 before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and was granted bail vide order dated 27.07.2026. It is further submitted that on the ground of parity, another co-accused, namely Narayan Prasad Sahu, has been

¶22

¶23

granted bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in MCRC No. 7666/2026 vide order dated 18.08.2026. He would further submits that the seizure witness has turned hostile during trial. The case of the present applicant is similar to that of the aforesaid co-accused persons. He further submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedent therefore, on the ground of parity and prolonged incarceration, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant.

¶24

4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail. However, he could not dispute the fact that similarly situated co-accused Shyam Babu Choudhary has been granted bail by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 27.07.2026 in SLP (Crl.) No. 9672/2026 and that co-accused Narayan Prasad Sahu has also been granted bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in MCRC No. 7666/2026 vide order dated 18.08.2026. He also could not dispute that the seizure witness has turned hostile. So far as the criminal antecedents of the applicant are concerned, he submits that no criminal antecedent is reflected in the ICJS portal however, the applicant is a resident of the State of Haryana and information regarding his previous criminal antecedents from the said State is still awaited. Looking to the seriousness of this case, the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail.

¶25

5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary.

¶26

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the fact that the applicant is in judicial custody since 28.08.2025, the investigation has been completed and charge-sheet has been filed

¶27

¶28

before the competent Court, coupled with the fact that the similarly situated co-accused Shyam Babu Choudhary, whose bail application was rejected by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in MCRC No. 3982/2026 vide order dated 30.04.2026, has subsequently been granted bail by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 27.07.2026 in SLP (Crl.) No. 9672/2026 and another co-accused Narayan Prasad Sahu has also been granted bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in MCRC No. 7666/2026 vide order dated 18.08.2026, as well as the fact that the seizure witness has turned hostile and the State could not dispute the said facts and further considering that no criminal antecedent of the applicant is reflected in the ICJS portal and without further commenting anything on the merits of the case, I am inclined to grant regular bail to the applicant.

¶29

7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed . It is directed that in the event of the applicant executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:-

¶30

(i) he 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 him from disclosing such fact to the Court; (ii) he shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial, &

¶31

(iii) he shall appear before the trial Court on each and

¶32

¶33

every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial.

¶34

8. Ofce is directed to send a certif fi ed copy of this order to the trial i

¶35

Court for necessary information and compliance. dorthwith.

¶36

S/Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge

¶37

Kunal

Devendra Sharma v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Devendra Sharma v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases