1 2026:CGHC:9252 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 10347 of 2025 Ramanjeet Saluja S/o Iqbal Singh Saluja Aged About 31 Years Occupation Proprietor Ramanjeet Mens And Accessories Shop R/o Near Vivekanand Ashram Police Station Azad Chowk District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Tikrapara, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh .. Non-applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Sandeep Kumar Jain, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Vaishali Mahilong, Dy. Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 23/02/2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 600/2025, registered at Police Station : Tikrapara, Raipur District- Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 21(C), 27, 27(A), 29 of NDPS Act and Section 111 of BNS. 2. As per the prosecution story, on 03.08.2025, upon receiving KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 information from an informant, the police of Police Station Tikrapara, District Raipur, proceeded to take action in accordance with the mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act and conducted a raid at the place of occurrence situated at EWS B-Block, House No. 504, Sector-4, Kamal Vihar, in front of Sky Villa, within the jurisdiction of Police Station Tikrapara, Raipur. At the spot, co- accused Suvit Shrivastava, along with two other persons namely Lovjeet Singh and Ashwan Chandrawanshi, were found present. Their memorandum statements were recorded and their personal search as well as the search of their bags and rooms was conducted. During the search, 10.23 grams of Chitta along with a mobile phone and other articles were recovered from the possession of accused Suvit Shrivastava and 402.64 grams of Chitta kept in three transparent packets along with a mobile phone and other articles were recovered from the possession of accused Lovjeet Singh, while a mobile phone was seized from the possession of accused Ashwan Chandrawanshi, and investigation was initiated for offences punishable under Sections 21(c) and 29 of the NDPS Act. During the course of investigation, on 16.08.2025, the present applicant/accused Ramanjeet Singh Saluja was apprehended and interrogated and his memorandum statement was recorded, wherein he stated that for purchasing Chitta he used to make payments to the HDFC Bank account No. 50200106747292 of co- accused Ashwan Chandrawanshi through his Union Bank of India account No. 619402010017228, linked with mobile number 3 8770136172. He further stated that he had made transactions amounting to approximately Rs. 71,240/- on about 34 occasions in the bank account of co-accused Ashwan Chandrawanshi and had purchased approximately 7–10 grams of Chitta. He also stated that for purchasing Chitta, half of the amount was paid in cash by Ankit Soni, resident of Sundar Nagar, and half of the contraband was supplied to him. Both of them used to consume the Chitta and also sell a portion thereof. Thus, the involvement of the present applicant/accused Ramanjeet Singh Saluja in the alleged offence is prima facie evident and he has been arrested in connection with the aforesaid crime. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant vehemently argued that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case and that the offences registered against him are only under Section 27 of the NDPS Act, which relates to personal consumption. It is submitted that no contraband substance has been recovered from the possession, custody or premises of the applicant and the search of his residence and shop did not yield any narcotic substance, thereby clearly demonstrating that the applicant was neither involved in possession nor in sale of narcotics and is only a drug addict. It is further submitted that the applicant has been implicated solely on the basis of the memorandum statement of co- accused Ashwan Chandrawanshi, which has no evidentiary value in law and there is no independent material connecting the applicant with the alleged offence. It is also submitted that the monetary transactions between the applicant and the co-accused were purely 4 commercial in nature relating to legitimate business dealings for purchase of clothing materials and accessories, which have been wrongly construed as incriminating by the police. The applicant is a businessman running a shop in the name and style of Ramanjeet Singh Men’s Cloth & Accessories and the financial transactions made through PhonePe and other online modes were only for lawful business purposes and the applicant had no knowledge of any alleged involvement of the co-accused in narcotic activities. It is further submitted that the applicant has fully cooperated with the investigation, appeared before the police whenever required and disclosed all relevant facts, yet he has been falsely arrested. It is also submitted that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and is a young businessman of good character and the sole earning member of his family. 4. Learned counsel further submits that the applicant is entitled to default bail under Section 187(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, as the applicant was arrested on 16.08.2025 and the statutory period of 90 days prescribed for completion of investigation and filing of charge-sheet in respect of offence under Section 27 of the NDPS Act expired on 16.11.2025, but the charge- sheet was not filed within the prescribed period. It is submitted that the applicant had already filed an application for grant of default bail before the learned trial Court on 17.11.2025, specifically pointing out that the statutory period had expired and therefore he had acquired an indefeasible and constitutional right to be released on default bail. It is further submitted that under Section 27 of the 5 NDPS Act the maximum punishment is one year imprisonment or fine or both and therefore the prescribed period for filing of charge- sheet is 90 days and failure of the prosecution to file the charge- sheet within the said period entitles the applicant to statutory bail. In support of his submissions, learned counsel has placed reliance upon the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Rakesh Kumar Paul Vs. State of Assam, Kapil Wadhawan Vs. State, Smraddhi @ Meena Devi Vs. State of M.P., Mohammad Sajid Vs. State and Kalandar Shafi Vs. State and submits that the right to default bail is a constitutional right flowing from Article 21 of the Constitution of India. It is further submitted that the applicant has also submitted complaints before the Hon’ble Chief Minister of Chhattisgarh and the Superintendent of Police, Raipur, regarding his false implication, which are presently under inquiry. Therefore, the applicant deserves to be released on default bail. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the offences registered against the applicant and the co-accused persons are under Sections 27A, 27 read with 21(c) and 29 of the NDPS Act and Section 111 of the BNS, for which the permissible period prescribed for completion of investigation and filing of the charge-sheet is 180 days. Hence, the submission of learned counsel for the applicant that he is involved only in the offence punishable under Section 27 of the NDPS Act and is entitled to default bail on expiry of 90 days is wholly misconceived and unfounded. It is further submitted that a quantity of contraband much above the commercial quantity has been 6 recovered from the possession of the co-accused person. The allegation against the present applicant is that he had been purchasing contraband (Chitta) from the co-accused in quantities of about 7–10 grams and there were approximately 34 financial transactions between the applicant and the co-accused in connection with the illegal trade of narcotic substances. It is submitted that the material collected during investigation prima facie establishes the involvement of the applicant in an organized narcotic trade and therefore, considering the gravity and seriousness of the offence and the statutory provisions involved, the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail or default bail. 6. In compliance with the order dated 15.12.2025, the Investigating OfÏcer has filed a personal afÏdavit disclosing that during investigation, it was revealed from the iPhone mobile recovered from co-accused Lavjeet Singh @ Bunty that he was in regular voice and video call contact with several foreign numbers including Nepal, Indonesia, Pakistan, United Kingdom and Saudi Arabia, indicating an organized network for supply of Chitta (Heroin) from outside India. Further investigation revealed that the accused persons were operating an organized narcotic trade in Raipur through WhatsApp and online transactions. The bank account analysis disclosed approximately Rs. 1.10 lakhs illegal transactions made by the present applicant Ramanjeet Singh Saluja to the accounts of co-accused persons for purchase of contraband, which is also supported by his memorandum statement. The investigation further revealed that the applicant used to purchase contraband 7 through online payments and thereafter sell the same for profit. On the basis of the material collected during investigation, offences under Sections 21(C), 27, 27(A) and 29 of the NDPS Act, Section 111(4) of BNS and Section 25 of the Arms Act have been registered, which clearly indicate involvement of the applicant in an organized narcotic trade. Considering the seriousness of allegations and the fact that the applicant was arrested after considerable efforts, there is every likelihood that if released on bail, he may abscond or tamper with the prosecution evidence and repeat similar offences. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 8. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of the offence and the material available in the case diary and also considering the afÏdavit filed by the concerend investigating ofÏcer, particularly the fact that commercial quantity of contraband has been recovered from the possession of the co- accused person and further considering that during the course of investigation the involvement of the present applicant has prima facie surfaced on the basis of his memorandum statement as well as bank transactions showing approximately 34 monetary dealings between the applicant and the co-accused in relation to purchase of contraband, this Court is of the opinion that at this stage it cannot be said that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant has also failed to furnish any satisfactory or plausible explanation regarding the said financial transactions. 8 Further, considering that the offences registered against the applicant and the co-accused persons include Sections 27A, 21(c) and 29 of the NDPS Act, which involve commercial quantity of contraband, the permissible period for completion of investigation and filing of the charge-sheet is 180 days and therefore the contention of the applicant regarding entitlement to default bail after expiry of 90 days is not sustainable. 9. In view of the seriousness of the offence, the nature of allegations, the material collected during investigation and the statutory provisions involved, this Court is not inclined to grant regular bail or default bail to the applicant. 10. Accordingly, the bail application filed by the applicant deserves to be and is hereby rejected. 11. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned, is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 12. OfÏce 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 Kunal