1 2025:CGHC:60573 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9751 of 2025 Panpati Kumari D/o Babulal Singh Aged About 21 Years R/o Badikhajuri, Police Station Bargad, District Gadva (Jharkhand) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Rajpur, District Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Awadh Tripathi, 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.85/2025, registered at Police Station- Rajpur, District- Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 22(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, the NDPS Act). 2. The prosecution story in brief, is that, on 15.04.2025, Inspector 2 Kumar Chandan Singh, posted at Police Station Rajpur, received a tip-off from an informant that a girl was standing in the ground in front of Jhingo Church carrying illegal drugs in a black bag and was awaiting a prospective customer. Acting on the said information, the police reached the Jhingo Church Ground and upon verification, found a girl standing with a black bag. On conducting a search, 300 pieces of Avil Pheniramine Maleate Injection (I.P.) of 10 ml each and 300 pieces of NRX Raxogesic Buprenorphine Injection (I.P.) of 2 ml each were recovered and seized from the said bag. Thereafter, an offence was registered against her and, upon availability of sufficient incriminating material, she was taken into custody. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents and deserves to be enlarged on bail. It is contended that one of the allegedly recovered articles, namely Avil Injection, does not contain any substance prohibited under the NDPS Act and therefore its recovery is irrelevant for the purpose of prosecution. As regards the alleged recovery of 300 pieces of NRX Raxogesic Buprenorphine Injection (I.P.) of 2 ml each, it is submitted that the total prohibited content comes to only 150 mg (0.25 mg × 2 ml × 300), which is much below the notified ‘small quantity’, and thus the rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act are not attracted. Learned counsel further submits that the offence is punishable with imprisonment ranging from one year to a maximum of three years, and in light of the principles laid down 3 in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, (2021) 10 SCC 773, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. He lastly submits that the applicant is a young girl aged about 21 years, is languishing in jail since 15.04.2025, 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 300 pieces of Avil Pheniramine Maleate Injection (I.P.) of 10 ml each and 300 pieces of NRX Raxogesic Buprenorphine Injection (I.P.) of 2 ml each were recovered, which is much above the commercial quantity 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, 300 pieces of Avil Pheniramine Maleate Injection (I.P.) of 10 ml each and 300 pieces of NRX Raxogesic Buprenorphine Injection (I.P.) of 2 ml each were recovered which is much above the 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 – Panpati Kumari involved in Crime No.85/2025, registered at 4 Police Station- Rajpur, District- Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 22(C) 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