1 2025:CGHC:34255 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1057 of 2025 Alok Pandey S/o Rakesh Pandey Aged About 39 Years R/o Ward No.- 39, Ganjpara, District - Durg (C.G.), (Wrongly Mentioned As Vikas Pohekar, Aged About 20 Years In The Covering Memo Of Impugned Order) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - P.S. - City Kotwali, District - Durg (C.G.), (Wrongly Mentioned As District Magistrate Durg In The Cause Title Of The Impugned Order) ... Respondent For Applicant : Shri Sameer Rigri, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Ms. Vaishali Mahilong, PL. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order On Board 18/07/2025 1. The applicant has preferred this application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’), GOURI MUDALIAR Digitally signed by GOURI MUDALIAR Date: 2025.07.21 17:07:02 +0530 2 for grant of anticipatory bail, apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.309/2025, registered at Police Station -City Kotwali, District-Durg (C.G) for alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 21(b) and 27(a) of Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that upon receiving the secret information on 2.7.2025 the police authorities went near Preeti Store situated at Shitla Pond, Durg and caught hold of the co- accused namely Vikas Pohekar with the contraband substance. The co-accused was found in possession of 11.56 gram of brown sugar and 585 gram of Nitrazepam Tablets. The applicant has been incriminated in the instant matter on the ground of memorandum of co-accused wherein it has been stated by him that the contraband has been purchased from the applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedent, further there is no recovery has been made from the present applicant, only on the basis of memorandum statement of the co- accused, the present applicant has been arrested, therefore, he prays to enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the application for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant. 3 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence levelled against the applicant and the fact that co-accused Vikas Pohekar was found in possession of 11.56 gram of brown sugar and 585 gram of Nitrazepam Tablets and in the memorandum of co-accused, it has been stated by him that the said contraband has been purchased from the present applicant, hence the involvement of the present applicant appears to be reasonable in the instant case and it cannot be a case of false implication, thus this Court is of the view that it is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. 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. 8. Accordingly, the present anticipatory bail application is dismissed. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice gouri