1 2025:CGHC:22260-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPCR No. 292 of 2025 Ajay Sahani S/o Babu Lal Sahani Aged About 28 Years Resident of Atal Awas Sakri, P.S. Sakri, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through- Its, Principal Secretary, Department of Home (Jail) Mahanadi Bhavan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The District Magistrate Bilaspur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 3 - The Senior Superintendent of Police Bilaspur District- Raipur (C.G.) (Complainant) 4 - Station House Officer Police Station Sakri, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Pawan Kumar Kashyap, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad , Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 22.05 .2025 1. Heard Mr. Pawan Kumar Kashyap, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, learned Government Advocate appearing for the State/respondents. ANURADHA TIWARI Digitally signed by ANURADHA TIWARI Date: 2025.05.22 17:27:27 +0530 2 2. The petitioner has filed this petition with the following prayers:- “10.1 To call for entire records from respondents pertaining to case for the petitioner for kind perusal of the Hon’ble High Court. 10.2 To quash the impugned order dated 22.04.2025 (Annexure P-1) passed by the Commissioner Cum-Arresting Officer, Bilaspur Division Bilaspur Chhattisgarh, in the interest of justice. 10.3 To release on bail to the petitioner, in the interest of justice. 10.4 To grant any other relief deemed fit and proper in facts and circumstances of the case.” 3. Brief facts of the case, are that total five criminal cases; such as bearing (i) Crime No.302/2011 for offence under Section 21, 22 of Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, ‘NDPS Act’) (ii) Crime No.734/2012 for offence under Section 21, 22 of NDPS Act, (iii) Crime No.108/2018 for offence under Section 21, 22 of NDPS Act, (iv) Crime No.320/2020 for offence under Section 21, 22 of NDPS Act, and (v) Crime No.968/2020 for offence under section 21, 22 of NDPS Act were 3 registered against the petitioner. The Commissioner-cum- Arresting Officer, Bilaspur Division, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh was initiated criminal proceeding under Section 3(1)10 of the Prevention of illicit Traffic in Narcotics Drug Substance Act, 1988 against the petitioner and it was found that five criminal cases of NDPS Act have registered against the petitioner, in which the petitioner has been acquitted in only one criminal case and convicted in four criminal cases, which are pending consideration. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order dated 22.04.2025 (Annexure-P/1) passed by the Commissioner-cum-Arresting Officer, Bilaspur Division Bilaspur Chhattisgarh is completely illegal, erroneous and contrary to the law and hence, the same is liable to be set-aside. He further submits that though the petitioner is having 5 criminal record of the NDPS Act, but the Commissioner-cum-Arresting Officer, Bilaspur Division Bilaspur Chhattisgarh has passed the major punishment order for arresting the petitioner, which is against the law because due to the said order, whole family members of the petitioner are being mentally harassed and adversely affected to survival. It has been contended that the Commissioner-cum- Arresting Officer, Bilaspur Division Bilaspur Chhattisgarh should have adopt the liberal view while passing the impugned order, as such, the impugned order dated 22.04.2025 passed by the Commissioner-cum-Arresting Officer, Bilaspur Division Bilaspur Chhattisgarh be quashed. 4 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel supported the impugned order and submits that there were 5 criminal cases of NDPS Act have been registered against the petitioner and out of 5 criminal case, only in one case, petitioner has been acquitted and remaining 4 cases are pending before the Court concerned, as such, there is no need for interference by this Court with the impugned order. 6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents annexed with the writ petition. 7. From perusal of the record, it transpires that total five criminal cases; such as bearing (i) Crime No.302/2011 for offence under Section 21, 22 of Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, ‘NDPS Act’) (ii) Crime No.734/2012 for offence under Section 21, 22 of NDPS Act, (iii) Crime No.108/2018 for offence under Section 21, 22 of NDPS Act, (iv) Crime No.320/2020 for offence under Section 21, 22 of NDPS Act, and (v) Crime No.968/2020 for offence under section 21, 22 of NDPS Act were registered against the petitioner, to which, the learned Commissioner-cum-Arresting Officer, Bilaspur Division, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh was initiated criminal proceeding under Section 3(1)10 of the Prevention of illicit Traffic in Narcotics Drug Substance Act, 1988 against the petitioner and it was found that five criminal cases of NDPS Act have registered against the petitioner, in which the petitioner has been acquitted in only one 5 criminal case and convicted in four criminal cases, which are pending consideration. 8. Considering the matter in its entirety, particularly, the fact that out of five criminal case, the petitioner has been acquitted in only one criminal case and four cases are still pending, we are of the considered opinion that no interference is called for by this Court in its extraordinary power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for grant of any relief to the petitioner. 9. The petition lacks merit and is, accordingly, dismissed. Sd/- Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Anu