1 2025:CGHC:22906 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2802 of 2025 1 - Himanshu Chandrakar Alias Chhotoo (Peti. In Person) S/o Hemlal Chandrakar Aged About 39 Years R/o Saraipali, Thana - Bel Tukri, District - Nuapada (Orissa) ... Applicant versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through - S.H.O. - Kumhari, District - Durg (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Ms. Kumud Chandrakar, Mother of the applicant in person. For State : Mr. Bharat Gulbani, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 10/06/2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.32/2025 registered at Police Station Kumahari, District-Durg (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 20(B)(ii)(C) of the NDPS Act. 2. Ms. Kumud Chandrakar, mother of the applicant, appearing in person submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. She further submits that so far as amount of Rs.5 VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Date: 2025.06.19 10:59:40 +0530 2 lac., which is alleged to have been recovered from sale proceed of 35.9 kgs of Ganja is concerned, the said amount has not been recovered from the applicant. Infact, the said amount was not obtained by sale of Ganja, indeed, the same was received by sale of paddy, as the applicant and his family members are farmers by profession and they have obtained the said amount by sale of paddy to the society. She also submits that the applicant is in jail since 10.03.2025 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for releasing the applicant on regular bail. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the State/non-applicant would oppose the bail application and the submission made by the mother of the applicant, appearing in persons, specifically with regard to recovery of Rs.5 lacs and submits the documents (i.e. bank statements of the applicant and his father) so annexed in support of the bail application does not reflect that the said amount has been received by the sale of paddy. He also submits that the applicant is a habitual offender, as earlier also the applicant has found to be involved in two case of NDPS Act, of which, details has been given in Para-4A of the present bail application. Though, out of the said cases, in Crime No.120/2021, registered at Police Station Chura, District Gariyband (CG), the applicant is said to have been acquitted by the trial Court on 03.05.2025, but in another case, the applicant alongwith other co-accused persons therein have been convicted by the trial Court on 06.12.2019 for offence under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act and sentenced to undergo RI 3 for 03 years with fine of Rs.10,000/- and, against which, CRA- 1954-2019 is pending considering before this Court and, in CRA-1954-2019, the applicant has been granted bail by the Co- ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 02.01.2020. He also submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court. He further submits that the applicant is having 02 criminal antecedent under the NDPS Act and applicant has already granted bail by this Court in the CRA 1954 of 2019 vide order dated 02.01.2020 as such, he is a habitual offender and is not entitled for grant of bail. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 5. Considering the fact that the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and, in the present case, recovery of Rs.5 lacs. has been alleged against the applicant and, though it is submitted on behalf of the applicant that the said amount has been received in lieu of sale of paddy by the applicant, but the documents so filed before this Court does not reflect that the said amount has been received by sale of paddy and further the applicant is a habitual offender, as earlier he has been found involved in 2 cases of NDPS Act and though, in Crime No.120/2021, registered at Police Station Chura, District Gariyband (CG), the applicant is said to have been acquitted by the trial Court on 03.05.2025, but in another case, the applicant alongwith other co-accused persons therein have been convicted and sentenced by the trial Court on 06.12.2019 for offence under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act and, against 4 which, CRA-1954-2019 is pending considering before this Court and, even after, in CRA-1954-2019, the applicant has been granted bail by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 02.01.2020, again he is found involved in the present case and, therefore, has misused the bail granted to him earlier and also in light of the judgment rendered by the Supreme Court in Deepak Yadav v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Another, reported in (2022) 8 SCC 559, wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court had cancelled the bail granted to the accused therein on the ground that the accused had previous antecedents, this Court is of the opinion that is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant- Himanshu Chandrakar, involved in Crime No.32/2025 registered at Police Station Kumahari, District- Durg (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 20(B)(ii)(C) of the NDPS Act is rejected. 6. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 7. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaishali