2026:CGHC:5277 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1041 of 2026 Mohd. Vakil S/o Late Mohd. Jalil Aged About 33 Years R/o Ward No. 07, Old Gaurela Road P.S.- Pendra, District : Gaurela-Pendra-Marwahi, Chhattisgarh ...Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer Police Station- Nagarnar, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh ...Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Subham Tiwari, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Sourabh Sahu, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 30.01.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this Second Bail Application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.17/2020, registered at Police Station : Nagarnar District – Bastar (C.G) for the offence punishable under Section 20(B) of the NDPS Act. 2. The earlier bail application of the applicant, MCRC No. 6613 of 2021, was dismissed as withdrawn by this Court vide order dated 06.09.2021, with liberty to file afresh. VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.01.31 18:11:29 +0530 3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 22.01.2020, the police of Police Station Nagarnar, District Bastar (C.G.), received secret information that a person was transporting ganja in a white Innova vehicle bearing registration No. MP-07-BA-5133. Acting upon the said information, the police laid a blockade at Amaguda Bamhani Chowk on NH-63 Main Road and intercepted the said vehicle. Upon search of the vehicle, 42 packets of ganja were recovered from the rear seat, having a total weight of 210 kilograms. After complying with all mandatory requirements under the NDPS Act, the contraband was seized and, thereafter, an offence under Section 20(B) of the NDPS Act was registered against the present applicant, who was arrested by the police. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present application is the second bail application. The first bail application was rejected by a co-ordinate Bench of this Hon’ble Court in MCRC No. 6613 of 2021 vide order dated 06.09.2021; however, while rejecting the said application, this Hon’ble Court was pleased to grant liberty to the applicant to revive his prayer for bail after examination of the search and seizure witnesses. It is submitted that, pursuant to the liberty so granted, substantial progress has been made in the trial. Out of a total of 11 prosecution witnesses cited in the charge-sheet, as many as seven witnesses have already been examined by the prosecution, including the seizure witness. It is further submitted that the said seizure witness, who is a crucial witness for the prosecution, has not supported the prosecution case and has turned hostile during trial. Learned counsel further submits that the applicant has been in judicial custody since 22.01.2020 and has thus undergone a prolonged period of incarceration. In view of the liberty earlier granted, the examination of the seizure witness, the hostile testimony of a material prosecution witness, and the long period of custody already suffered by the applicant, learned counsel prays that the applicant be enlarged on bail in the present case. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that 42 packets of Ganja, having a total weight of 210 kilograms, were recovered from the rear seat in the possession of the present applicant, which is well above the commercial quantity. Therefore, it is submitted that the 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. From a careful perusal of the pleadings and submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, it appears that no new ground has been raised in the present (second) bail application except that the statements of four out of eleven prosecution witnesses are yet to be recorded. It is further observed that the liberty to file a fresh bail application had already been granted to the applicant earlier. Considering the nature and gravity of the offence, the quantity of contraband allegedly recovered, the seriousness of the allegations against the applicant, and the material available on record, this Court is of the considered opinion that no exceptional circumstances have been made out which would justify the grant of bail at this stage. Accordingly, the second bail application of the applicant is liable to be rejected. 8. Accordingly, the Second bail application of the applicant – Mohd. Vakil, involved in Crime No.17/2020, registered at Police Station : Nagarnar District – Bastar (C.G) for the offence punishable under Section 20(B) of the NDPS Act, is rejected. 9. The concerned Superintendent of Police is directed to ensure that the four prosecution witnesses who are yet to be examined appear before the trial Court on the next fixed date. 10. The Registrar (Judicial) is directed to communicate this order to the concerned Superintendent of Police, District – Bastar, for necessary information and compliance. 11. 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 vaibhav