2026:CGHC:27321 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4886 of 2026 Raja Khateek @ Raja Sonkar S/o Lalman Sonkar Aged About 33 Years Occupation- Private Work R/o Behind Shiv Parvati Mandir Bhartipur P.S. Omti District- Jabalpur M.P. ...Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- P.S. Komkhana District- Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : None. For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Smita Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 02.07.2026 1. None appears nor is any representation made on behalf of the applicant to press this bail application when the case is called out. 2. The applicant has preferred this Second 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. 138/2024, registered at Police Station - Komkhana District- Mahasamund (C.G) for the offence punishable under Section 20(B) of the N.D.P.S. Act. 3. The earlier bail application of the applicant being MCRC No. 8445 of VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.07.06 12:15:44 +0530 2025 was rejected on merits by this Court vide order dated 27.10.2025. 4. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 26.10.2024 investigation officer on round in Dehat when he reached Bus-stand Komakhan, he received information from informer, that 3 persons were traveling in VERN Car bearing registration No. O.R.17 G0211 having Ganja and coming from Odisha, and applicant persons piloting to car by driving Scooty. That investigation officer seized 3 Bori containing Ganja. That the each bori containing 15 Kg of contraband and total quantity of contraband is 45 kg seized from the joint possession of accused persons. That investigation had completed and final report submit before the Court of Law. 5. On the other hand, learned State Counsel appearing for the State/non-applicant opposed the bail application and submitted that, although the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court, the applicant is not entitled to the benefit of bail in view of his long criminal antecedents. It is submitted that the applicant is involved in several criminal cases registered at Police Station Omati, Police Station Lordganj, Police Station Kotwali and Police Station Belbagh, all situated in District Jabalpur (M.P.), which are still pending before the competent Courts, namely, Crime No. 292/2014, Police Station Omati, under Section 109 IPC and Section 13 of the Gambling Act; Crime No. 360/2025, Police Station Omati, under Sections 20 and 29 of the NDPS Act; Crime No. 291/2016, Police Station Omati, under Sections 294, 323, 324, 34 and 506 IPC; Crime No. 79/2022, Police Station Omati, under Sections 294, 323, 34 and 506 IPC; Crime No. 580/2024, Police Station Lordganj, under Sections 8, 20 and 29 of the NDPS Act; Crime No. 415/2024, Police Station Lordganj, under Sections 8, 20 and 29 of the NDPS Act; Crime No. 342/2024, Police Station Lordganj, under Sections 8, 20 and 29 of the NDPS Act; Crime No. 613/2023, Police Station Lordganj, under Sections 294, 323, 34 and 506 IPC; Crime No. 649/2021, Police Station Lordganj, under Sections 294, 323, 324, 327, 34 and 506 IPC; Crime No. 295/2018, Police Station Lordganj, under Sections 294, 323, 506 and 34 IPC; Crime No. 168/2017, Police Station Lordganj, under Sections 294, 324 and 327 IPC; Crime No. 317/2014, Police Station Lordganj, under Sections 324 and 506 IPC; Crime No. 253/2013, Police Station Kotwali, under Sections 294, 323, 34, 341 and 506 IPC; Crime No. 812/2012, Police Station Kotwali, under Sections 294, 323, 506 and 34 IPC; Crime No. 45/2014, Police Station Belbagh, under Sections 323, 324 and 34 IPC; Crime No. 322/2014, Police Station Belbagh, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 294, 324, 427, 452 and 506 IPC; Crime No. 169/2020, Police Station Belbagh, under Sections 294, 323, 34, 342 and 506 IPC; and Crime No. 74/2011, Police Station Belbagh, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 294 and 307 IPC read with Section 3/5 of the Explosive Substances Act. Learned State Counsel submits that the applicant has repeatedly involved himself in offences relating to narcotic drugs, offences against the human body, unlawful assembly, gambling and other serious offences, and the pendency of the aforesaid criminal cases clearly demonstrates that the applicant is a habitual offender having a propensity to indulge in criminal activities. It is, therefore, prayed that the present bail application deserves to be rejected. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and also taking into account the fact that as many as 18 criminal cases are pending against the applicant, out of which four cases are registered 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. 8. Accordingly, the second bail application of the applicant – Raja Khateek @ Raja Sonkar, involved in Crime No. 138/2024, registered at Police Station - Komkhana District - Mahasamund (C.G) for the offence punishable under Section 20(B) of the N.D.P.S. Act, is rejected. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaibhav