1 2026:CGHC:6328 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1214 of 2026 Rajesh Singh Bhumihar S/o Late Rajveer Singh Aged About 37 Years R/o Village Behind Baikunthdham Mandeer, Camp- 2, Bhilai, Police Station Chhavni, District- Durg (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House O3cer, Police Chowki Bundeli, Police Station Cantonment (Chhavni), District- Durg (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Ms. Aditi Singhvi, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Ms. Nupur Trivedi, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 04.02.2026 1. This is the second bail application 8led under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 411/2024 registered at Police Chowki – Bundeli, Police Station – Cantonment (Chhavni), District Durg (C.G.) for the o<ence punishable under Section 21(c) of N.D.P.S Act, 1985. 2. The 8rst bail application of the applicant was rejected on merits by this Court vide order dated 18.02.2025 passed in MCRC No. 1384/2025. 3. The prosecution story, in brief, is that on the basis of secret information ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2026.02.06 11:08:41 +0530 2 received by the police through a mobile phone, it was informed that one co-accused, namely Arman Naiel, was in possession of narcotic capsules in his Activa vehicle bearing Registration No. CG-07-AB-6263. Thereafter, the police o3cials reached the spot and apprehended the co- accused red-handed and recovered Proxy OHM Spa Capsules (Tramadol), i.e., 30 strips containing a total of 720 capsules, weighing 574.200 grams. The co-accused was arrested and his memorandum statement was recorded, in which he stated that he had purchased the said capsules from the present applicant. Thereafter, on the basis of the memorandum statement of the co-accused, the police arrested the present applicant and, upon his search, allegedly recovered 372 Proxy OHM Spa Capsules from the right pocket of his pant. Accordingly, a crime was registered against the accused persons for the o<ence punishable under Section 21(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that this is the second bail application of the applicant and the 8rst bail application was rejected on merits by this Court in MCRC No. 1384/2025 on 18.02.2025. He would submit that the applicant is in jail since 13.09.2024, charge sheet has been 8led and out of 15 prosecution witnesses, evidence of only 8 prosecution witnesses have been recorded, conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for releasing the applicant on regular bail. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. From perusal of the records, it transpires that this is the second bail application of the applicant and the 8rst bail application was rejected on 3 merits by this Court in MCRC No. 1384/2025 on 18.02.2025. The contraband article i.e. tramadol, which was recovered from the possession of the applicant was above the commercial quantity, further the ground which has been raised in this second bail application is that the applicant is in jail since 13.09.2024 and out of 15 prosecution witnesses, evidence of only 8 prosecution witnesses have been recorded. 8. Recently the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Union of India (UOI) Vs. Vigin K. Varghese (Special Leave Petition (Cri.) Nos.7768 of 2025 and 11097 of 2025) decided on 13.11.2025 has observed that in NDPS commercial-quantity cases, long incarceration cannot, by itself, be a ground for bail. 9. Considering the fact that the 8rst bail application of the applicant was rejected on merits by this Court, further the fact that trial is in progress and also in the light of observation made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Vigin K. Varghese (supra) that in NDPS commercial-quantity cases, long incarceration cannot, by itself, be a ground for bail, therefore I do not 8nd any good ground to entertain this second bail application. Accordingly, the second bail application of the applicant- Rajesh Singh Bhumihar, involved in Crime No. 411/2024 registered at Police Chowki – Bundeli, Police Station – Cantonment (Chhavni), District Durg (C.G.) for the o<ence punishable under Section 21(c) of N.D.P.S Act, 1985, is rejected. 10. O3ce is directed to send a certi8ed copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- 11. The Director General of Police, Chhattisgarh, is directed to ensure the presence of the prosecution witnesses, including one seizure witness 4 and six prosecution witnesses who are police personnel, for recording their evidence on the next date 8xed. Failing this, their salaries shall be stopped, as the conclusion of the trial is being delayed due to the laxity of the police personnel, and the accused has been languishing in jail since 13.09.2024. 12. A copy of this order be sent to the Director General of Police, Chhattisgarh through the learned State counsel for information and necessary action forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Abhishek