1 2025:CGHC:3097 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 445 of 2025 Gurfan Siddhiqui @ Sonu S/o Lt. Ehsan Siddhiqui Aged About 46 Years R/o Imlipara, Thana Ambikapur, Surguja Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through S.H.O. Police Station Gandhi Nagar, District – Sarguja, Chhattisgarh.. ---- Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Awadh Tripathi, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Malay Jain, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 17.01.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) in connection with Crime No.364/2024, registered at Police Station – Gandhi Nagar, District – Sarguja (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Section 22C and 27A of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, for short, the NDPS Act. RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI Date: 2025.01.22 10:36:10 +0530 2 2. The prosecution story in brief, is that the Police of Police Station – Gandhi Nagar, District – Sarguja (C.G.) has received a secret information through the informant and on the basis of the said information, the Police authority has seized total 1500 injections of Rexogesic Buprenorphine Injection ip 2 ml each, and a total of 1500 injections of Pheniramine Injection ip 10 ml each, from the possession of the co-accused, and the applicant’s name has come into light from the memorandum statement of the co- accused person. Thereafter, the applicant was arrested and the case was registered by the Police. 3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed in this case. The applicant is in jail since 14.10.2024. The conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of bail. 4. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submits that a total of 1500 injections of Rexogesic Buprenorphine Injection ip 2 ml each, and a total of 1500 injections of Pheniramine Injection ip 10 ml each, from the possession of the co-accused, which is much above the commercial quantity, and the applicant’s name has come into light from the memorandum statement of the co-accused person. There are two criminal antecedents of the applicant under the 3 NDPS Act which is pending. It is further submitted that the charge- sheet has been filed in this case. Hence, this bail application is liable to be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. Taking into consideration the fact that the quantity of contraband article seized i.e. 1500 injections of Rexogesic Buprenorphine Injection ip 2 ml each, and a total of 1500 injections of Pheniramine Injection ip 10 ml each, seized from the possession of the co-accused, is much above the commercial quantity, and the applicant’s name has come into light from the memorandum statement of the co-accused person, is much above the commercial quantity and the applicant is failed to give any explanation for the same and it could not be a case of false implication, the charge-sheet has been filed in this case, further there are two criminal antecedents of the applicant under the NDPS Act which are pending, he is a habitual offender and he 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 it is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. 4 7. Accordingly, the bail application of applicant – Gurfan Siddhiqui @ Sonu involved in Crime No.364/2024, registered at Police Station – Gandhi Nagar, District – Sarguja (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Section 22C and 27A of the NDPS Act, is rejected at this stage. 8. Needless to say that the learned trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed with the trial and conclude the same, expeditiously. 9. The Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rajshekhar