1 2025:CGHC:60572 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9838 of 2025 Dinesh Kumar Bairagi @ Dainy S/o Late Manohardas Bairagi Aged About 34 Years R/o Ward No. 3, Awas Plot Dabhra, Police Station- Dabhra, District- Sakti (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer Of Police Station- Dabhra, District- Sakti (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Aamir Khan, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Ms. Soumya Sharma, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 12.12.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the BNSS in connection with Crime No.43/2025, registered at Police Station- Dabhra, District- Sakti (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 22(A) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, the NDPS Act). 2. The prosecution story in brief, is that, on the basis of information 2 received from an informer, 368 capsules of Spasmo Proxyvon Plus were recovered and seized from the applicant/accused Dinesh Kumar Bairagi on 30.01.2025. During interrogation, the applicant disclosed that he had obtained the said capsules from co-accused Satish Manhar, from whom 144 capsules were subsequently seized. On further questioning, co-accused Satish Manhar revealed that he had procured the capsules from co- accused Vipin Soni. The call detail records of their communications were extracted, and upon collecting information regarding the monetary transactions made to the bank account, co-accused Vipin Soni was arrested on 14.02.2025. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent court. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not committed any offence and has been falsely implicated in the present case, as there is no direct evidence linking him to the alleged crime. It is further submitted that the mandatory procedures under the NDPS Act were not duly followed, inasmuch as although the prosecution alleges seizure of 368 tablets from the applicant, no weighing was conducted at the spot or before the Judicial Magistrate during physical verification. Only after the sample was sent to the FSL, a second physical verification was carried out and the weight of the seized tablets was noted, thereby rendering the investigation doubtful. It is also argued that the trial is likely to be delayed. Moreover, the co-accused namely 3 Vipin Chandra Soni has already been granted bail by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP (Crl.) No. 7813/2025 dated 29.08.2025, and another co-accused namely Satish Manhar has been granted bail by this Court in MCRC No. 8188/2025 dated 14.10.2025 and as such, the applicant prays for grant of bail on the ground of parity. He lastly submits that applicant is languishing in jail since 31.01.2025, charge-sheet has already been filed and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take a long time, hence he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submits that from the possession of applicant, total 368 capsules of Spasmo Proxyvon Plus were recovered, which is much above the commercial quantity. Further so far as bail applications of co-accused are concerned, from the possession of both the co-accused, the contraband article seized was less than commercial quantity, as such, the case of the present applicant is entirely different from that of the co-accused person and hence, the bail application of the applicant is liable to be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. Taking into consideration the nature and gravity of the offence and the fact that from the possession of applicant, 368 capsules of Spasmo Proxyvon Plus were recovered which is much above the commercial quantity and further the co-accused who have been 4 granted bail are concerned, from the possession of both the co- accused, the contraband article seized was less than commercial quantity. In such a situation, considering the nature and quantity of the seized narcotic substance, it would not be justified to grant bail to the applicant/accused. 7. Therefore, the bail application filed by the applicant/accused – Dinesh Kumar Bairagi @ Dainy involved in Crime No.43/2025, registered at Police Station- Dabhra, District- Sakti (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 22(A) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, the NDPS Act), is rejected at this stage. 8. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned, is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 9. Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Akhil