1 2025:CGHC:61346 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9199 of 2025 Jishan Ahmed S/o Late Suleman Ahmed Aged About 23 Years R/o House No. 245, Purkazi, Jojgaon Mohalla, Post Purkazi, Tehsil Muzaffarnagar, Police Station Purkazi, District Muzaffarnagar (Uttar Pradesh) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer, Police Station Kotwali, Jagdalpur, District Bastar (C.G.) ---- Non-Applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Sunil Verma, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Vaishali Mahilong, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 16/12/2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the BNSS for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 58/2025 registered at Police Station Kotwali, Jagdalpur District - Bastar (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 20(B)(II)(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 2. As per the prosecution story in brief, on 12.02.2025, the ofÏcials of Kotwali Police Station received a tip-off that two individuals, one wearing a red T-shirt and the other wearing a black T-shirt with white shoes, were jointly in possession of three large bags, namely, a red trolley bag, a maroon trolley bag and a camouflage army backpack, containing an illegal narcotic substance, i.e., cannabis (ganja). It was further informed that the said individuals had transported the contraband from Odisha and were waiting at Aamaguda Lalbagh Chowk, Jagdalpur, along Raipur Road, to board a bus heading towards Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand. The said information was recorded in the daily diary and communicated to senior ofÏcers and a report regarding receipt of the information was prepared. Constable No. 1093 Ravi Sardar was deputed to secure two independent witnesses. As it was not feasible to obtain a search warrant, a panchnama (ofÏcial memorandum) was prepared to that effect. Thereafter, Constable No. 1093 Ravi Sardar returned with two independent witnesses, namely, Ankit Pandey and Ratnakar Shindre. In the presence of the said witnesses, the accused persons were apprehended, from whose possession a total quantity of 78.106 kg of ganja was allegedly recovered. Thereafter, the aforementioned offences were registered against the accused. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is an innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the present case on the basis of a false and concocted prosecution story. It is further submitted that the applicant is a student belonging to a poor 3 family and was allegedly promised a petty amount merely for delivery of the trolley bags and as such he had no role in the commission of the alleged offences. He further submits that the applicant had no knowledge about the contents of the bags he was asked to deliver and that the investigating authorities arrested him without proper application of mind. It is also submitted that the applicant was accompanied by another person and that an aggregate quantity of 78.106 kg of contraband cannabis was allegedly recovered from both of them jointly, therefore, the quantity attributed to the present applicant would come to approximately 39 kg only. He further submits that the applicant has no nexus with the alleged offence and was merely acting under instructions. It is lastly submitted that the charge-sheet has already been filed and two ofÏcial witnesses have been examined, and therefore, the continued detention of the applicant is not warranted. Accordingly, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the State/non-applicant oppose the prayer for grant of bail and submits 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. 78.106 kgs of Ganja recovered from the joint possession of the applicant along with co-accused, which is much above the commercial quantity 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 case diary. 4 6. From perusal of the case diary, it transpires that the contraband article seized from the joint possession of the applicant along with the co-accused, i.e., 78.106 kg of ganja, is much above the commercial quantity. Therefore, it cannot be said to be a case of false implication and the applicant has failed to furnish any plausible explanation with regard to the same. Hence, this Court does not find it to be a fit case to release the applicant on regular bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant – Jishan Ahmed, filed under Section 483 of the BNSS, involved in Crime No. 58/2025 registered at Police Station Kotwali, Jagdalpur District - Bastar (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 20(B)(II)(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 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. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal