1 2025:CGHC:24688 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 854 of 2025 1 - Md. Sameer S/o Gayasuddin Aged About 28 Years R/o Karaundamuda Uparpara, Thana And Tehsil Bhaiyathan, District- Surajpur, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Bhatgao District - Surajpur Chahttisgarh ... Respondent For Applicant : Ms. Renu Kochar, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, Government Advocate Hon’ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 16/06/2025 1. The applicant has preferred this application under Section 482 of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for grant of Anticipatory Bail, apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2025, registered at Police Station – Bhatgao District – Surajpur (C.G.) for the alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 20(B), 29 of NDPS Act. VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Date: 2025.06.19 17:36:19 +0530 2 2. As per prosecution story in brief is that 20.05.2025 information was received from an informer at Police Station Bhatgao that three persons were coming to Karandamuda on a motorcycle to sell ganja. Police cordoned off the area in village Laxmipur in front of witnesses. During the cordon, 2 kg 240 gram ganja was recovered from Karamveer Patle, Faijan Raza and Arif Raza. After completing the proceeding, a complaint was registered on the spot. On the basis of the complaint, crime number of police station Bhatgao was registered Crime No.75/2025 under Section 20(B), 29 NDPS Act against Karamveer Patle, Faizan Raza, Arif Raza, Sameer Raza, Suresh Singh, Manoj Singh a first information report was lodged against him. That, on the basis of memorandum statement recorded of co-accused namely Karamveer Patle he has stated that the present applicant has asked him to purchase the contraband. Hence on the basis of the statement given by co-accused the present applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. Hence this bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. She further submits that no recovery of contraband from the present applicant and he has no knowledge of the contraband and his name being misused and there is no material to link the applicant with the recovery of the alleged quantity of contraband, the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act would not applied. She also submits that there is no direct recovery of the ganja from the present 3 applicant, only on the basis of memorandum statement of the co-accused present applicant is falsely implicated in the present case. Therefore, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the present applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the submission made by the learned counsel for the applicant and submits that looking to the overt-act applicant is not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Recently the Supreme Court in the matter of Anarul SK v. The State of West Bengal {SLP (Crl.) No(s). 12621/2024 has observed that the grant of anticipatory bail in cases involving Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) is a very serious issue. 7. In the light of observation made by the Supreme Court in Anarul SK (supra), I do not find any good ground to entertain this anticipatory bail application. Accordingly, the present anticipatory bail application is dismissed. sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaishali