1 2026:CGHC:24116 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3417 of 2026 • Vinod Gupta S/o Shri Satan Gupta Aged About 35 Years R/o Village Rupahitad Thana Bhitha, District East Champaran (Bihar) ... Applicant(s) versus • State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station-Ganj District-Raipur, C.G. ... Respondent(s) (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Vikas Kumar Bajpai, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shubham Bajpai, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 16/06/2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.179/2025 registered at Police Station-Ganj Distt.- Raipur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 20(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that Police Station-Ganj, Raipur received secret information to the effect that three persons who are in possession of two trolly bags, three bags carried on back and in one cloth bag have kept Ganja in them for the purpose of illegal sale and VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Date: 2026.06.19 14:33:23 +0530 2 have lodged in hotel "Udaydeep" room number 205 situated at station road Raipur. On receipt of the such information, the police party raided the place and found 18.320 kg Ganja from the possession of accused Pradeep Kumar Sanodia, 16.590 kg Ganja from the possession of accused Dinesh Gupta and 13.405 kg Ganja from the possession of present applicant and thus total 48.36 kg Ganja recovered from their possession. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He also submits that total 48.36 kgs Ganja has been recovered from the possession of applicant and other two accused persons, who had lodged in hotel ‘Udaydeep’ in Raipur (C.G.). He further submits that from the possession of the applicant less than commercial quantity of the psychotropic substance (Ganja) has been seized, and therefore, it will not attract the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act as the commercial quantity of ganja as prescribed under the schedule is more than 20 Kgs and from the possession of the applicant only 13.405 Kgs Ganja has been seized. He later submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedent and he is in jail since 20.07.2025 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State/non- applicant would oppose the bail application and submit that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court and submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedent. He further stated that total of 48.36 kgs of Ganja was recovered from the applicant and two other accused; these accused were staying at the 'Udaydeep' Hotel in Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 13.405 kg of Ganja was 3 seized from the applicant, indicating his involvement in the crime; therefore, he is not entitled to bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. From perusal of the case diary, it transpires that though the contraband article, which has been recovered from the joint possession of the applicant and other two accused persons i.e. 48.36 Kg of Ganja is more than the commercial quantity and from the exclusive possession of the present applicant total 13.405 kg of Ganja was seized and he has failed to give explanation for the said recovery, further it cannot be a case of false implication, the trial is in progress, therefore, this Court finds no ground to grant bail to the present applicant. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant- Vinod Gupta, involved in Crime No.179/2025 registered at Police Station-Ganj Distt.- Raipur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 20(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, is rejected. 8. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Vaishali