Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 22648 (CHH)

KAMAL RANA v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

MCRC/3575/2026 · 2026-06-21

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2026:CGHC:25473 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3575 of 2026 1 - Kamal Rana S/o Anirudh Rana Aged About 32 Years R/o Village Chhelibahal, Police Station Bausuni, District- Boudh (Odisha) 2 - Sanjit @ Dilip Bhoi S/o Devraj Bhoi Aged About 20 Years R/o Village Lakshmiprasad, Police Station Banomuda District- Boudh (Odisha) ... Applicants versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Singhoda, District Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicants : Mr. Arun Kumar Shukla, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Ritika Verma, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 22.06.2026 1. This is the First bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for grant of regular bail to the applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 66/2025 registered at Police Station– Singhoda, District Mahasamund (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 20(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the Police of Police Station – Singhoda, District Mahasamund, (C.G.), had received secret information from the informant and on the basis of the said information conducted a raid and seized total 27 Kgs of Ganja from the joint possession of the present applicants. Thereafter, the Police has registered the offence punishable under Section 20(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 against the present applicants. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the present applicants have been falsely implicated in this case and the alleged contraband article was not recovered from the exclusive possession of the present applicants and no any contraband article has been seized from the applicants. He also submits that the present applicants have been arrested only on the basis of suspicion. He also submits that the applicants have no previous criminal antecedents, the charge-sheet has been submitted before the competent Court, and they are in jail since 07.08.2025 and conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the present applicants. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicants and submits that the quantity of contraband article i.e. total 27 Ganja from the joint possession of the present applicants, which is much above the commercial quantity, as such, the applicants are not entitled to be released on bail. 3 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and further the fact that the seized contraband article i.e. total 27 Kg of Ganja from the joint possession of the present applicants, is much above the commercial quantity and the applicants have failed to give any explanation for the same, further it cannot be a case of false implication. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicants – Kamal Rana and Sanjit @ Dilip Bhoi, involved in Crime No. 66/2025 registered at Police Station– Singhoda, District Mahasamund (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 forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan