1 2026:CGHC:11458 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2201 of 2026 Subhash Rana S/o Venudhar Rana Aged About 35 Years R/o Antarsingha, P.S. Aathmalik, District Angul (Odissa) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Bhatgaon, District Sarangarh- Bilaigarh C.G. ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Ms. Vidhi Matlani, Advocate. 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 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 59/2024 registered at Police Station – Bhatgaon, District Sarangarh- Bilaigarh (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 20(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 11/03/2024, the police authorities, upon receiving secret information that a person was in possession of contraband articles and was carrying them in a vehicle, conducted a search. Acting on the said information, the police authorities allegedly seized 23 kilograms of ganja from the vehicle of the applicant. Thereafter, the police authorities registered a case against the applicant PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2026.03.11 12:36:27 +0530 2 3. The first bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court on merit vide order dated 20.05.2025 passed in MCRC No. 3978/2025. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the applicant has been in judicial custody since 11.03.2024. So far as the status of the trial is concerned, out of 16 prosecution witnesses, only 04 witnesses have been examined till date. It is also submitted that the bail petition of the applicant was earlier rejected by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 10873/2025 vide order dated 08.09.2025, a copy of which has been annexed as Annexure A/5 to the present application. Learned counsel further submits that the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents and that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time. Therefore, it is prayed that the present applicant be enlarged on regular bail. 5. Learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed in the present case before the competent Court. He further submits that the first bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court on merits vide order dated 20.05.2025 passed in MCRC No. 3978/2025. It is further submitted that the bail petition of the applicant has also been rejected by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 10873/2025 vide order dated 08.09.2025. Hence, it is contended that in view of the earlier rejection of the bail applications, the present applicant is not entitled to be released on bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Recently the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Union of India 3 (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. 8. Taking into consideration the fact that this is the second bail application filed by the applicant, and it transpires from the record that the first bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court on the ground that the contraband article seized from the joint possession of the present applicant and other co-accused persons was more than the commercial quantity and the applicant failed to give any satisfactory explanation for the same, therefore it could not be treated as a case of false implication. It is further noticed that the bail petition of the applicant has already been rejected by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 10873/2025 vide order dated 08.09.2025. Further considering the status of the trial, wherein out of 16 prosecution witnesses, 04 witnesses have already been examined, this Court is of the opinion that this is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. 9. Considering the fact that the first bail application of the applicant was 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 Union of India (UOI) (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. 10. Accordingly, the second bail application of the applicant - Subhash Rana filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, involved in Crime No. 59/2024 registered at Police Station – Bhatgaon, District Sarangarh- Bilaigarh (C.G.), for the offence punishable under 4 Section 20(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, is rejected. 11. However, this Court hope and trust that the trial Court shall make an earnest endeavour to conclude the trial within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, if there is no legal impediment. 12. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Preeti