1 2026:CGHC:22622 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4492 of 2026 Tinku Shikari @ Mohd. Joseph @ Chandrashekhar Nayak S/o Karunakar Nayak Aged About 35 Years R/o Bijli OfÏce, Thana And Tahsil Padampur, District Bargarh Odisha ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station Saraipali, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Hari Agrawal, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Sameeksha Gupta, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 13.05.2026 1. This is the First bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 179/2025 registered at Police Station – Saraipali, District – Mahasamund (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 21(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act. 2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that on 17.07.2025, the Head Constable, along with Constables No. 53, 157, and 867, was on patrolling duty in Government Vehicle No. CG-03-0179. When they ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2026.05.15 14:05:45 +0530 2 reached near Jognipali Turn, close to SR Rice Mill, Toresinha, the police party received secret information that two persons travelling on a black- coloured scooty bearing Registration No. OD-17-Y-7663 had concealed some narcotic substances (intoxicating tablets) in the dickey beneath the seat of the vehicle. Acting upon the said information, the police party waited at the spot, and after some time, the described vehicle was intercepted by the police. Two independent witnesses were called to the spot. Upon being questioned, the driver of the vehicle disclosed his name as Kamal Dadsena, while the pillion rider disclosed his name as Gaurav @ Golu Stapathy. Thereafter, the police party conducted a search of the vehicle and allegedly recovered 245 ampoules of Pentazocine Lactate Injection, 25 bottles of cough syrup (100 ml each), and 198 tablets of Nitrazepam from the dickey of the scooty. After the alleged seizure, during the course of investigation, the aforesaid accused persons informed the police that the material had been supplied to them by one Deepak Mishra. Thereafter, the said Deepak Mishra was arrested and, in his memorandum statement, stated that he had purchased the said material from the present applicant. Subsequently, the applicant herein was arrested and, upon completion of the investigation, a final report in respect of the aforesaid offences was filed against the applicant herein along with the other co-accused persons. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and that the alleged contraband article was not seized from his conscious possession. It is further contended that the applicant has no direct role or nexus with the commission of the alleged offence. Learned counsel submits that, apart from the memorandum statement of the co-accused, there is no other incriminating material available on record in the final report against the 3 applicant. It is also argued that the mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act were not duly complied with and that the concerned police authorities failed to conduct a proper investigation before lodging the FIR against the applicant. Learned counsel further submits that the applicant has only two criminal antecedents, out of which one pertains to an offence under the NDPS Act and the other under the IPC, and in both cases, the applicant has already been granted bail. It is further submitted that the applicant has been in judicial custody since 20.07.2025, and considering that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time, continued incarceration would amount to pre-trial punishment. On these grounds, learned counsel prays for grant of regular bail to the present applicant. 4. Learned State counsel vehemently opposes the bail application and submits that, acting on secret information, the police intercepted the co- accused persons and recovered a substantial quantity of narcotic substances, including Pentazocine Lactate injections, cough syrup, and Nitrazepam tablets, from their possession. During the course of investigation, the co-accused persons disclosed that the seized contraband had been supplied through Deepak Mishra, who, in his memorandum statement, stated that he had procured the said material from the present applicant. It is further submitted that the present applicant is, therefore, directly connected with the supply chain of the contraband substances and has a clear nexus with the commission of the alleged offence. Learned State counsel also submits that the bail applications of the other co-accused persons, namely Gaurav @ Golu Satpathi and Kamal Dadsena, have already been rejected by this Court in MCRC No. 180 of 2026 and MCRC No. 19 of 2026, respectively. Considering the serious nature of the allegations, the fact that the seized 4 contraband is above commercial quantity, the applicant’s criminal antecedents, she prays for rejection of the present bail application. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the nature and gravity of the allegations, the quantity of contraband seized being above commercial quantity, and the material collected during investigation indicating the applicant’s involvement in the supply chain of the seized narcotic substances, this Court is not inclined to extend the benefit of bail to the present applicant. Furthermore, in view of the criminal antecedents of the applicant, as well as the fact that the bail applications of the other co-accused persons, namely Gaurav @ Golu Satpathi and Kamal Dadsena, have already been rejected by this Court in MCRC No. 180 of 2026 and MCRC No. 19 of 2026, respectively, the present bail application also deserves to be rejected. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant – Tinku Shikari @ Mohd. Joseph @ Chandrashekhar Nayak, involved in Crime No. 179/2025 registered at Police Station – Saraipali, District – Mahasamund (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 21(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, is rejected. 8. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 9. OfÏce is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) ChiefJustice Abhishek