1 2025:CGHC:54356 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8754 of 2025 Vikram Meher S/o Pramod Meher Aged About 30 Years R/o Naktigud, P.S. Junagarh, District Kalahandi (Orrisa) (Details Not Mentioned Completely In Order Sheet) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House O4cer, P.S. - Devbhog, District - Gariyaband (C.G.) ---- Non-Applicant(s) (Cause Title taken from Case Information System) For Applicants : Ms. Anamika Jain, Advocate. For Non-Applicant : Ms. Ankita Shukla, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 07/11/2025 1. This is the 9rst bail application 9led 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. 126/2024 registered at Police Station, Devbhog, District- Gariyaband (C.G.), for the o=ence punishable under Section 20(B)(ii)(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 02.04.2024, the Police of Police Station Devbhog, District Gariyaband, received a tip-o=. KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 Acting on the information, the police conducted a search and raid, during which 25 kg of contraband ganja was allegedly seized from the joint possession of the present applicant and the co-accused. Thereafter, a criminal case was registered against them. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. She further submits that none of the mandatory provisions have been followed by the prosecution in the case and the seizures are beyond logical acceptance as are contradicted as none of it were ever done. From the present applicant there has been only one mobile phone was seized by the police and further the seizure witness of the above alleged case have not supported the prosecution story and in the present case, charge-sheet has been 9led, the conclusion of the trial may take quite long time. Accordingly, she prays for enlarging the applicant on regular bail. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the State/non-applicant opposes the bail application and submitted that the charge-sheet has already been 9led before the competent Court. The case diary further reBects that the applicant was allegedly driving the motorcycle on which the co- accused was seated while carrying the contraband article. From their possession, 25 kilograms of ganja, well above the commercial quantity, was recovered. It is also pointed out that the seizure witnesses have turned hostile. In these circumstances, it is contended that the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 3 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and upon perusal of the case diary, it appears that 25 kilograms of contraband ganja, which is much above the commercial quantity, has been seized from the joint possession of the applicant and the co-accused. The case diary reBects that the present applicant was allegedly driving the motorcycle, while the co-accused was seated behind him carrying the contraband. The material collected during investigation prima facie indicates their joint involvement in transporting the illegal substance. It is further pointed out that the seizure witnesses have turned hostile and releasing the applicant at this stage may adversely a=ect the fair progress of the trial. Having regard to the seriousness of the o=ence, the quantity of the contraband, and the overall circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to grant bail to the applicant. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant – Vikram Meher 9led under Section 483 of the BNSS, involved in Crime No. 126/2024 registered at Police Station, Devbhog, District- Gariyaband (C.G.), for the o=ence punishable under Section 20(B)(ii)(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, is rejected. 8. Needless to say that the the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 9. O4ce is directed to send a certi9ed copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal