1 2026:CGHC:11484 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2230 of 2026 1 - Shekhar Pal S/o Shri Rameshwar Pal Aged About 32 Years R/o Indira Gandhi Ward, Pipariya, District Narmadapur M.P. 2 - Devanshu Mogre @ Bablu S/o Late Jaldas Mogre Aged About 24 Years R/o Village Funga P.S. Bhalumada, District Anuppur M.P. ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer, Police Station - Pendra, District Gourella-Pendra-Marwahi Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant(s) For Applicants : Mr. Sourabh Kumar Sharma, Advocate (through V.C.). For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Shailendra Sharma, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 10.03.2026 1. This is the second bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 310/2024 registered at Police Station – Pendra, District Gourella-Pendra-Marwahi (C.G.) for the offence punishable under KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 Sections 20(b) and 29 of N.D.P.S Act. 2. The first bail applications of the applicants were rejected on merits by this Court vide order dated 04.11.2025, 21.01.2026 passed in MCRC No. 8742/2025 and MCRC No. 657/2026 respectively. 3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 20.10.2024, the police of Police Station Pendra received secret information from an informant that the present applicant along with other co-accused persons was transporting illegal narcotic substances. Acting upon the said information, the police intercepted a car bearing registration No. MH-02/EH-1015, checked the dicky of the said vehicle and seized approximately 34.300 kg of narcotic substance from their possession. During the course of investigation, a co- accused, in his memorandum statement, disclosed that some other persons, namely Rameshwar Ahirwar, Babloo Rani and Shekher Pal, were also involved in the said offence and that they used to transport the narcotic substance in a car bearing registration No. CG-16C-Q-4781, and were also involved in the illegal sale of the said narcotic substance. On the basis of the aforesaid memorandum statement, the police arrested the present applicants along with other co-accused persons and registered the above- mentioned offence against them. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case and have neither committed nor participated in the alleged offence. It is submitted that this is the second bail application, as the earlier bail applications of the applicants were rejected by this Court vide 3 orders dated 04.11.2025 in M.Cr.C. No. 8742/2025, 21.01.2026 in M.Cr.C. No. 657/2026, with a direction to the learned trial Court to proceed with the trial and conclude the same expeditiously. However, despite the said direction, the trial has not progressed expeditiously and out of 21 prosecution witnesses only 5 witnesses have been examined till date, while the remaining witnesses are yet to be examined. It is further submitted that the independent seizure witnesses have turned hostile, copies of the deposition of PW-2 to PW-5 being filed as Annexure P/7 to P/10. He further submits that the applicants are in custody since 2024, the investigation has been completed and the charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore their further custodial interrogation is not required. It is also submitted that the prosecution case is based on the information of an informant and there is no independent material to establish that the applicants were knowingly in possession of the alleged contraband or involved in its transportation. Considering the delay in conclusion of trial, the fact that material witnesses have already turned hostile and the applicants have remained in custody for a considerable period, it is prayed that the applicants be enlarged on bail. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. From the perusal of the record, it transpires that this is the second bail application filed by the applicants, as their earlier bail 4 applications were rejected on merits by this Court. The record further reveals that 34.300 kg of contraband article (ganja), which is above the commercial quantity as prescribed under the Schedule of the NDPS Act, was recovered from the possession of the co- accused persons. During the course of investigation, the said co- accused persons, in their memorandum statements, disclosed that the present applicants were also involved in the commission of the alleged offence and alleged that their role was to pilot the vehicle of the co-accused persons who were carrying the contraband article. The principal ground raised in this second bail application is that the applicants are in judicial custody since 21.10.2024 and 12.12.2024, respectively and out of 21 prosecution witnesses, only 5 witnesses have been examined so far before the trial Court. 8. Recently the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Union of India (UOI) Vs. Vigin K. Varghese (Special Leave Petition (Cri.) Nos.7768 of 2025 and 11097 of 2025) decided on 13.11.2025 has observed that in NDPS commercial-quantity cases, long incarceration cannot, by itself, be a ground for bail. 9. Considering the fact that the first bail applications of the applicants were rejected on merits by this Court, further the fact that trial is in progress and also in the light of observation made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Vigin K. Varghese (supra) that in NDPS commercial-quantity cases, long incarceration cannot, by itself, be a ground for bail, therefore I do not find any good ground to entertain this second bail application. Accordingly, the second bail application of the applicants- Shekhar Pal and Devanshu Mogre 5 @ Bablu, involved in Crime No. 310/2024 registered at Police Station – Pendra, District Gourella-Pendra-Marwahi (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 20(b) and 29 of N.D.P.S Act, is rejected. 10. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 11. 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