1 2026:CGHC:23253 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4629 of 2026 Jagdish @ Virat S/o Ramfal Gupta Aged About 29 Years R/o Mayapur Rented House Of Krishan Soni P.S. Ambikapur District Surguja C.G. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer P.S. Ambikapur District Surguja C.G. ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Shakti Raj Sinha, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Shubham Bajpai, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 15.05.2026 1. This is the second bail application filed under Section 483 of the BNSS for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 112/2025 registered at Police Station - Ambikapur District Surguja, (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 21(C), 22(C) and 29 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. 2. The earlier bail application of the applicant being MCRC No. 6893 of 2025 was rejected by this Court vide order dated 01.09.2025 on merits. RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the co-accused persons were intercepted by the police on suspicion, and during search and seizure, 108 bottles of WNGS RX syrup of 100 ml each containing Codeine Phosphate and 100 pieces of Buprenorphine injection of 2 ml each containing psychotropic substances were recovered from their possession. It is further alleged that during the course of investigation, it was revealed that the present applicant had transferred a sum of Rs. 25,000/- into the account of a co-accused person through his mobile phone using UPI, and on that basis, the allegation of financing of the offence has been levelled against the present applicant. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that this is the second bail application of the applicant and the earlier bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Hon’ble Court. He further submits that the present applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present offence. It is submitted that no contraband substance, much less any psychotropic substance, has been recovered from the possession of the applicant and his implication is purely based on conjectures and surmises. He further submits that co-accused Anil Gupta @ Babu Gupta, whose chicken shop is situated adjacent to the shop of the applicant, had approached the applicant on 17.02.2025 stating that his UPI was not functioning, and on his request the applicant transferred an amount of Rs. 25,000/- to his account, and thereafter, on the 3 asking of the said co-accused, the amount was further sent to another mobile number, without any knowledge or involvement of the applicant in any illegal activity. It is further submitted that apart from the said transaction, there is no connecting link or independent evidence to establish any nexus of the applicant with the alleged offence under Section 29 of the NDPS Act or any alleged financing of illicit activity. He further submits that out of 13 persecution witnesses, only 06 prosecution witnesses have been examined till date before the learned Trial Court and the trial is likely to take considerable time for its conclusion, whereas the applicant has already undergone incarceration for about one year. It is also submitted that the allegation of aiding or financing the offence is not supported by any material evidence except the alleged UPI transaction, which by itself does not establish any criminal intent. Therefore, the applicant deserves to be released on bail. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has already been filed, he has no any previous criminal antecedents, is in jail since 21.05.2025 and there is no likelihood of tampering with the evidence, therefore the applicant deserves to be enlarged on second bail. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the present case relates to recovery of commercial quantity of contraband, wherein 108 bottles of WNGS RX syrup of 100 ml each containing 4 Codeine Phosphate and 100 vials of Buprenorphine injection of 2 ml each containing psychotropic substances were seized from the possession of the co-accused persons. It is further submitted that the investigation has revealed the active involvement of the present applicant in facilitating and financing the illegal trade, as an amount of Rs. 25,000/- was transferred by the applicant into the account of a co-accused through UPI, which clearly indicates his conscious participation in the illegal narcotic activities. Learned State counsel further submits that the offence involves commercial quantity of psychotropic substances and attracts stringent provisions of the NDPS Act, and therefore the statutory bar under Section 37 of the NDPS Act is clearly attracted in the present case. Considering the gravity of the offence, commercial quantity recovery, and the role attributed to the applicant in financing the illegal transaction, he submits that the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail and the application deserves to be rejected. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of allegations, the material available on record as well as the submissions advanced, it appears that this is a second bail application of the applicant and the earlier bail application has already been rejected on merits by this Court. The prosecution 5 case reflects that the matter pertains to recovery of commercial quantity of contraband substances, namely 108 bottles of WNGS RX syrup containing Codeine Phosphate and 100 Buprenorphine injections containing psychotropic substance from co-accused persons, which clearly falls within the ambit of serious and organized illegal narcotic activity. It is further alleged that during investigation the present applicant transferred an amount of Rs. 25,000/- through UPI into the account of a co-accused, thereby indicating his financial assistance and active participation in the said organized crime network dealing in illicit narcotic substances. Considering the overall facts that the offence involves commercial quantity, reflects organized criminal activity relating to illegal trade of psychotropic substances, the alleged role of the applicant in financing such activity, the statutory rigours under the NDPS Act, and the fact that the earlier bail application has already been rejected on merits, this Court is not inclined to take a different view in the present second bail application. 8. Accordingly, the second bail application of the applicant – Jagdish @ Virat, involved in Crime No. 112/2025 registered at Police Station - Ambikapur District Surguja, (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 21(C), 22(C) and 29 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, is rejected. 9. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 6 10. 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 Rajshekhar