1 CGHC010243062026 2026:CGHC:27694 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5931 of 2026 Chhotu Yadav @ Karunakar Yadav S/o Benudhar, Aged About 19 Years R/o Village Kenapara, P.S. And Tehsil Lailunga, Distt. Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. ...Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, P.S. Tamnar, Distt. Raigarh,Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent For Applicant :Mr. Ajeet Kumar Yadav, Advocate For respondent/State :Ms. Monika Thakur, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 06/07/2026 1. This is the Third bail application filed under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 222/2025 registered at Police Station – Tamnar, District - Raigarh (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 21(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.07.07 17:35:43 +0530 2 2. Earlier, two bail applications filed by the applicant were dismissed on merits by this Court vide orders dated 16.12.2025 and 19.02.2026 passed in MCRC No. 9844 of 2025 and MCRC No. 1726 of 2026, respectively. 3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on date of incident police officer received information from the informant that unknown persons has kept ban medicine in his motorcycle to sale and police has seized total 25 bottle aggregating to 2500 ml of Ornex Codeine Phosphate and Triprolidine Hydrochloride Syrup prohibited narcotic capsules were recovered and as a result thereof, police has registered offence publishable under section 21 (C) of the N.D.P.S. Act against the applicant 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended that the applicant has no nexus with the alleged incident and that no contraband/banned medicines were recovered from his exclusive possession, as the alleged seizure was effected from an open place. It is further submitted that the applicant had no knowledge of the alleged banned medicines and has been implicated merely on the basis of suspicion. Learned counsel further submits that, out of 17 prosecution witnesses, 2 have already been examined before the learned Trial Court and some of the witnesses examined have not supported the prosecution case. It is also contended that no illegal banned medicines were seized from the possession of the applicant, the allegations against him are false and fabricated, and he has not 3 committed any of the alleged offences. It is further submitted that the applicant is a permanent resident of the address mentioned in the cause title and, therefore, there is no likelihood of his absconding or tampering with the prosecution evidence. The applicant is ready and willing to furnish adequate surety and to abide by all such terms and conditions as may be imposed by this Court. Hence, it is prayed that the present third bail application be allowed. 5. Learned State counsel opposed the bail application and submitted that this is the third bail application filed by the applicant, whereas the earlier two bail applications have already been dismissed on merits by this Court. It was further submitted that, as per the prosecution case, prohibited narcotic cough syrup and capsules were recovered from the possession of the applicant, pursuant to which an offence under Section 21(c) of the N.D.P.S. Act was registered against him. Considering the recovery of commercial quantity of the contraband, the embargo contained under Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act is attracted. Since no substantial change in circumstances has been shown after rejection of the earlier bail applications, the applicant is not entitled to the grant of bail and the present application deserves to be dismissed. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the allegations, the recovery of commercial quantity of the 4 contraband from the possession of the applicant, the embargo contained under Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act, the fact that the applicant's earlier two bail applications have already been dismissed on merits, and further considering that out of 17 prosecution witnesses, only 2 have been examined before the trial Court and no substantial change in circumstances has been brought on record warranting reconsideration of the prayer for bail, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the present third bail application is dismissed. 8. Accordingly, the third bail application of the applicant – Chhotu Yadav @ Karunakar Yadav, filed under Section 483 of the BNSS, involved in Crime No. 222/2025 registered at Police Station – Tamnar, District - Raigarh (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 21(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, is rejected. 9. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall make an earnest endeavour to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible within a period of sex months from the receipt of certified copy of this order in accordance with law, if there is no legal impediment. 10. 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 Vaibhav