2026:CGHC:23331 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4641 of 2026 Pawan Nirmalkar S/o Pusau Nirmalkar Aged About 40 Years R/o Near Uslapur Fhatak, District- Bilaspur, (C.G.) ...Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer, Police Station- Civil Line, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Rahul Goswami, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Shailendra Sharma, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 15.05.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First 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. 162/2026, registered at Police Station - Civil Line, District- Bilaspur (C.G) for the offence punishable under Sections 20(B) & 29 of the NDPS Act. 2. The prosecution story in brief, is that the Informant on the incident date 30/01/2025. 220 Gram of narcotic substance Ganja VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.05.18 15:16:23 +0530 was recovered from the possession of accused Zahiran Bai alias Chhoti Bai in a white coloured carry bag by the police station civil line Bilaspur in the lane next to Mini Basti Jarhabhata liquor distillery. On finding the accused in possession of narcotic substance Ganja illegally, the police of Police station civil line Bilaspur registered a case under Section 20B, 29 NDPS Act under First Information Report No. 162/2026 and arrested the accused on 30/01/2026. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted applicant has neither committed nor participated in any offence punishable under Sections 20(B) and 29 of the NDPS Act, and no contraband or incriminating article has been seized from his possession. The prosecution allegations are false, baseless, and unsupported by any direct evidence or eyewitness account connecting the applicant with the alleged offence. As per the prosecution case, 220 grams of Ganja was recovered from the possession of co-accused Zahiran Bai @ Chhoti Bai on 30/01/2026 by Police Station Civil Line, Bilaspur, and the present applicant has been implicated without proper enquiry or investigation. The applicant did not act in the manner alleged by the prosecution and there is no material available on record to establish his involvement in the said crime. He is a permanent resident of the address mentioned in the cause title of this application, there is no likelihood of his absconding or tampering with prosecution evidence, and he undertakes to furnish adequate surety and abide by all such terms and conditions as may be imposed by this Hon’ble Court. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel appearing for the State/non-applicant opposed the bail application and submitted that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court. It is further contended that the applicant has criminal antecedents, including Crime No. 739/2016 registered under Section 20(B) of the NDPS Act at Police Station Civil Line, District Bilaspur, which stands disposed of; Crime No. 435/2019, Crime No. 115/2020 and Crime No. 707/2020, all registered under Section 20(B) of the NDPS Act, which are presently pending at the stage of evidence; Crime No. 836/2016 registered under Sections 294, 506, 323, 34 of IPC, which stands disposed of vide order dated 14/12/2019; and Crime No. 164/2026 registered under Sections 20(B) and 29 of the NDPS Act, which is pending at the stage of charge. Learned State Counsel submits that the pendency of the aforesaid criminal cases clearly reflects the applicant’s criminal antecedents and indicates that he is a habitual offender. It is argued that considering the seriousness of the allegations and the applicant’s repeated involvement in offences of similar nature, he does not deserve to be enlarged on bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and also taking into account the fact that four cases are pending against the applicant under the NDPS Act, which clearly indicates that the applicant is a habitual offender, and further, in light of the judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Deepak Yadav v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Another, (2022) 8 SCC 559, wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court cancelled the bail granted to the accused on the ground of having previous criminal antecedents, this Court is of the considered opinion that the present case does not warrant the grant of regular bail to the applicant. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant – Pawan Nirmalkar, involved in Crime No. 162/2026, registered at Police Station - Civil Line, District- Bilaspur (C.G) for the offence punishable under Sections 20(B) & 29 of the NDPS Act, is rejected. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaibhav