1 2025:CGHC:1769 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 204 of 2025 Santosh Kumar S/o Kailash Mahto Aged About 49 Years R/o Rajkhedha Satarba, District Palamu (C.G.) (Wrongly Mentioned As Order Sheet (C.G.) Correct State Jharkhand). ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House OfÏcer, P.S. Gandhinagar District Sarguja (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Varunendra Mishra, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Malay Jain, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 10.01.2025 1. This is the First bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 364/2024 registered at Police Station – Gandhinagar, District – Surguja (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 22(C) and Section 27(A) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. 2. As per prosecution story, in brief, is that on police of Police Station ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.01.10 20:12:17 +0530 2 Gandhinagar, District Surguja, received an information and on the basis of the secret information conducted a raid and seized Rexogesic buprenorphine injection IP 02 ml ampule total 1500 pieces (3000ml) and Avil pheniramine maleate injection IP 10 ml 1500 pieces quantity 15,000 ml from the possession of the present applicant, Accordingly the aforesaid offences were registered against the present applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in this case and the alleged contraband article were not seized from the possession of the present applicant. He further submits that only on the basis of the memorandum statement of the co-accused the applicant made an accused. He also submits that mandatory provisions of NDPS Act and the concerned police station did not take proper investigation before lodging FIR against the applicant. He further submits that the present applicant is in jail since 18.06.2024 and conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the present applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the alleged contraband articles, which were recovered from the possession of co-accused Pankaj Dhar Dubey, were purchased from the medical shop of the present applicant. The quantity of the recovered articles are much above the commercial quantity, therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of regular bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused 3 the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the alleged contraband articles, which were recovered from the possession of co-accused Pankaj Dhar Dubey, were purchased from the medical shop of the present applicant. The quantity of the recovered articles are much above the commercial quantity and the applicant has failed to give any explanation for the same and it cannot be a case of false implication. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant – Santosh Kumar, involved in Crime No. 364/2024 registered at Police Station – Gandhinagar, District – Surguja (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 22(C) and Section 27(A) 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. OfÏce is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) ChiefJustice Abhishek