1 2026:CGHC:23823 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2627 of 2026 Ajay Sahani S/o Tarkeshwar Sahani Aged About 23 Years R/o Village And Post Thikri, District- Barwani (M.P.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Khursipar, Bhilai, District - Durg (C.G.) ...Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Dhirendra Prasad Mishra, Advocate For Non-applicant : Ms. Ankita Shukla, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 15.06.2026 1 This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.171/2024 registered at Police Station Khursipar, District - Durg (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 20(b), 20(C) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, the NDPS Act). 2 The prosecution story, in brief, is that on the basis of secret information received on 05.09.2024, the police conducted a raid at Balaji Nagar, ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2026.06.16 15:01:17 +0530 2 Khursipar and apprehended the accused persons, from whose possession and premises a total of 45.145 kilograms of ganja was recovered and seized. During investigation, memorandums of the accused revealed that the contraband was being procured from Odisha and transported to Durg by Ajay Sahani, A.B. Sahani and Ajay Prasad, who allegedly delivered it to Pintu Kumar Sahani and G. Sarojini for illegal trade. It was further disclosed that the accused were paid Rs.6 lakh per trip and used different vehicle number plates to transport the contraband, indicating their active involvement in an organized and recurring narcotics trafficking operation. The quantity seized is much above the commercial quantity prescribed under the NDPS Act. 3 Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case. It is contended that no contraband was recovered from the conscious and exclusive possession of the applicant and his implication is mainly based on the memorandum statements of co-accused persons, which are not admissible in evidence except to the limited extent permitted by law. It is further submitted that the applicant has not committed any offence under the NDPS Act, the investigation has been completed and the charge-sheet has already been filed. It is also argued that there is no likelihood of the applicant absconding or tampering with the prosecution evidence and, considering his continued incarceration and the fact that the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude, he deserves to be released on bail. 4 On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that a huge quantity of 45.145 kilograms of ganja, which is much above the commercial quantity, has been seized in the present case. It is argued that the material collected during investigation, 3 including the memorandum statements of the co-accused persons, prima facie reveals the applicant's active involvement in the procurement and transportation of the contraband. Learned State counsel further submits that the bail applications of co-accused persons, namely G. Sarojini and Pintu Kumar Sahni, have already been rejected by this Court in MCRC No. 66/2025 and MCRC No. 4384/2026 vide orders dated 08.01.2025 and 11.05.2026 respectively. Therefore, considering the gravity of the offence, the commercial quantity involved and the bar contained under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail. 5 I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6 Considering the nature and gravity of the offence, the fact that a total of 45.145 kilograms of ganja, which is much above the commercial quantity prescribed under the NDPS Act, has been seized in the present case, and further taking into account the material collected during investigation indicating that the applicant was actively involved in the procurement and transportation of the contraband as part of an organized network, this Court is of the considered opinion that the rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act are attracted. This Court also cannot lose sight of the fact that the bail applications of co-accused persons, namely G. Sarojini and Pintu Kumar Sahni, have already been rejected by this Court in MCRC No.66/2025 and MCRC No.4384/2026 vide orders dated 08.01.2025 and 11.05.2026 respectively. In such circumstances, considering the nature of allegations, the quantity of the seized contraband and the role attributed to the applicant in the commission of the offence, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the applicant. Therefore, the bail application 4 filed by the applicant/accused – Ajay Sahani involved in Crime No.171/2024, registered at Police Station Khursipar, District Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 20(b), 20(c) and 29 of the NDPS Act, is rejected at this stage. 7 Needless to say that the trial Court concerned, is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 8 Office 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 Abhishek