1 2025:CGHC:46389 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7213 of 2025 Suraj Durga S/o Late Tapkeshwar Durga Aged About 31 Years R/o Gulab Nagar, Gudhiyari Rental House Of The Girdhar Dwivedi, Police Station Khamtarai District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Khamtarai District - Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Ms. Pooja Yadav, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 10/09/2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 76/2025 registered at Police Station Khamtarai District - Raipur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 22(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN 2 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 01.02.2025, Police Station Khamtarai, District Raipur (C.G.), received secret information from an informant regarding the illegal possession of Spasmo Proxyvon Plus capsules containing Dicyclomine, Tramadol, and Acetaminophen allegedly kept by the present accused/applicant for the purpose of sale. Acting upon this information, the police conducted a raid at the specified location and, upon search, recovered 1,440 capsules weighing a total of 907.20 grams from the possession of the applicant. The contraband was duly seized, and an offence under Section 22(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act was registered as Crime No. 76/2025. Based on the said information, seizure, and recovery, the present applicant was arrested for the offence punishable under Section 22(C) of the NDPS Act. Hence, the bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the alleged offence. The entire prosecution story is fabricated and lacks credibility. The alleged contraband was neither recovered from the applicant’s personal possession nor was he in conscious or exclusive possession of it. The seizure was made from an open place not owned or exclusively occupied by the applicant, and there is no clear mention in the seizure panchnama indicating that the contraband was recovered directly from him. Furthermore, there has been non-compliance with several mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act, which vitiates the prosecution case. The applicant had no knowledge of the contraband, and the recovery, as claimed by the police, is highly 3 doubtful. Even if the applicant is presumed to be in possession, the quantity is not of commercial scale, and in the absence of conscious possession, the applicant deserves to be released on bail. The applicant is languishing in jail since 01.02.2025. Accordingly, she prays for enlarging the applicant on regular bail. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the State/non-applicant opposes the bail application and submit that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court. She further submits that the quantity of contraband article i.e. 1,440 capsules weighing a total of 907.20 grams recovered from the possession of the applicant, which is much above the commercial quantity as notified under the NDPS Act and as such, the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the documents appended with it. 6. From perusal of the case diary, it transpires that the contraband articles i.e. 1,440 capsules weighing a total of 907.20 grams recovered from the possession of the applicant is much above the prescribed commercial quantity threshold and counsel for the applicant has failed to give plausible explanation regarding the same, it cannot be a case of false implication, particularly when the trial is in progress. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant - Suraj Durga, involved in Crime No. 76/2025 registered at Police Station Khamtarai District - Raipur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under 4 Section 22(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, is rejected. 8. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Akhil