1 2025:CGHC:60041 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 10173 of 2025 Manish Singh S/o Manoj Singh Aged About 25 Years R/o Masjid Para Gidam, P.S. - Gidam, Tahsil- Gidam, District- Daksin Bastar Dantewada (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station- Gidam, District- Daksin Bastar Dantewada (C.G.) ... Non-applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Vikas A. Shrivastava, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Swajeet Ubeja, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 10/12/2025 1. This is the Second bail application 昀椀led 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. 99/2024 registered at Police Station- Gidam, District – Dakshin Bastar Dantewada (C.G.), for the o昀昀ence punishable under Section 21(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. 2. Earlier 昀椀rst bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court being MCRC No. 8723/2024, vide order dated 12.12.2024, on merits. Hence this second bail application. 3. Case of the prosecution, in brief is that on 16.09.2024, as per received secret information, the Police of Police Station Gidam, District- Dakshin Bastar Dantewada (C.G.) seized Dicyclomine HCL, Tramadol HCL and ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.12.11 14:48:23 +0530 2 Acetaminophen HCL SPASMO PROXYVON PLUS/drug total 0.683 kg of Drug from the possession of the applicant, thereafter, the o昀昀ence has been registered against the applicant. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submit that this is the Second bail application 昀椀led on behalf of the applicant, the earlier 昀椀rst bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court on merits and the new ground for 昀椀ling of the second bail application is that after rejection of 昀椀rst bail application, some important prosecution witnesses and material witnesses have been examined and out of 10 prosecution witnesses, 05 witnesses have been examined and have turned hostile. He further submits that the alleged contraband was not seized from the possession of the applicant and the applicant has been falsely implicated by the police in the false case. Accordingly, he prays for enlarging the applicant on regular bail. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail and submit that the earlier 昀椀rst bail application of the applicant has already been rejected by this Court on merits further the quantity of contraband article which is said to have been recovered from the possession of the applicant, is much above the commercial quantity. Accordingly, the present applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Considering the above submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, as the prosecution witnesses have turned hostile, the same cannot be a good ground for releasing the applicant on bail as the same amounts to only tampering with the evidence. 8. From perusal of the records, it transpires that this is the second bail application 昀椀led on the behalf of the applicant, the 昀椀rst bail application of 3 the applicant was rejected by this Court being MCRC No. 8723/2024, vide order dated 12.12.2024, on merits further the quantity of contraband article which is said to have been recovered from the possession of the applicant, is much above the commercial quantity and the applicant has failed to give a plausible explanation with regard to the same and further the trial is in progress and the applicant has failed to raise any ground so as to warrant interference by this Court. 9. 9. Accordingly, the second bail application of the applicant –Manish Singh, 昀椀led under Section 483 of the B.N.S.S., involved in Crime No. 99/2024 registered at Police Station- Gidam, District – South Bastar Dantewada (C.G.), for the o昀昀ence punishable under Section 21(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, is rejected. 10. Needless to say that the trial concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 11. O昀케ce is directed to send a certi昀椀ed copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance. - Sd/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Abhishek