1 2025:CGHC:3098 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 451 of 2025 Tularam @ Atul Kumhar S/o Late Shobharam Kumhar Aged About 30 Years Caste- Kumhar, R/o Nawapara (Kala), Police Station-Sakti, District- Sakti (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Officer, Police Station- Sakti, District – Sakti (C.G.) ---- Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Amit Singh Chauhan, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, Government Advocate. 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.389/2024, registered at Police Station – Sakti, District – Sakti (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Section 22(A) 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 – Sakti, District – Sakti (C.G.) has received a secret information through the informant and on the basis of the said information, the Police authority has seized a total of 2350 pieces Alphozem Tablet from the possession of the present applicant. 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. It is further submitted that the co-accused has been granted bail by the trial Court concerned, and the copy of the order is annexed with the bail application as Annexure-A/2. The applicant is in jail since 23.10.2024. 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 the contraband article Alphozem Tablet which is said to have been recovered from the possession of the applicant is above the commercial quantity i.e. 100 grams, and the contraband article Alphozem Tablet seized from the possession of the applicant is more than the 250 grams, which is much above the commercial quantity. So far as the grant of bail to the co-accused by the trial Court concerned on a different putting as the name of the co-accused has come in the memorandum statement of the present applicant, hence, he has granted bail, to 3 which the counsel for the applicant submits that as per the order of the trial Court it appears that the contraband article was recovered was less than the commercial quantity, but it is admitted that no such recovery has been made from the co- accused persons. 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 contraband article Alphozem Tablet which is said to have been recovered from the possession of the applicant is above the commercial quantity i.e. 100 grams, and the contraband article Alphozem Tablet seized from the possession of the applicant is more than the 250 grams, which 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, so far as the grant of bail to the co-accused by the trial Court concerned on a different putting as the name of the co- accused has come in the memorandum statement of the present applicant, and it is admitted by the parties that no such recovery has been made from the co-accused persons as it is recovered from the possession of the present applicant, hence, the bail application of applicant – Tularam @ Atul Kumhar involved in 4 Crime No. 389/2024, registered at Police Station – Sakti, District – Sakti (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Section 22(A) of the NDPS Act, is rejected at this stage. 7. Needless to say that the learned trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed with the trial and conclude the same, expeditiously. 8. The OfÏce 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