Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 25729 (CHH)

MOHD. AHMED ANSARI v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

MCRC/5973/2026 · 2026-07-08

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 CGHC010256552026 2026:CGHC:28413 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5973 of 2026 Mohd. Ahmed Ansari S/o Mohd. Satar Ansari Aged About 39 Years R/o Village Karwa, P.S. Jainagar, District Surajpur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Officer Of Divisional Flying Scot Excise Division Surguja At Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. T.K. Jha, Senior Advocate with Mr. Parth kumar Jha, Advocate. For Non-applicant : Ms. Monika Thakur, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 09.07.2026 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 applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 54/2025 registered at Police Station – Divisional Flying Scot Excise Division Surguja At Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 22(C) of the NDPS Act 1985. 2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that on 31.05.2025 the officer has VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.07.09 19:08:33 +0530 2 received information by the informant the present applicant kept illegal contraband material in his house and sale the same without any authorization. That the officer came in the house of the applicant and search the house with the compliance of relevant section of act prescribed during the search officer seized 56 Rexogesic Buprenorphine injection total quantity 112 ml and 36 pices of Tramadol hydrochloride total quantity 72 ml. That the present applicant has been arrested on 31.05.2025 and after investigation challan was filed. 3. 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 not committed the alleged offence and has been arrested merely on the basis of suspicion without any credible material. It is further submitted that the seizure witnesses have already been examined during trial and have not supported the prosecution case, having turned hostile. The applicant has been in judicial custody since 04.03.2026, and the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude. Learned counsel further submits that the applicant is a permanent resident of the address mentioned in the cause title, owns movable and immovable properties, and there is no likelihood of his absconding or tampering with the prosecution evidence or influencing the witnesses. The applicant is ready and willing to furnish adequate bail bonds and abide by all the terms and conditions that may be imposed by this Hon'ble Court. 4. Learned State Counsel opposed the bail application and submitted that 56 Rexogesic (Buprenorphine) injections (112 ml) and 36 Tramadol Hydrochloride injections (72 ml), constituting a commercial quantity, 3 have been seized in the present case. Therefore, in view of the rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, the applicant is not entitled to the benefit of bail, and the bail application deserves to be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the allegations, the fact that 56 Rexogesic (Buprenorphine) injections (112 ml) and 36 Tramadol Hydrochloride injections (72 ml), constituting a commercial quantity, have been recovered, and the material collected during investigation prima facie indicating the involvement of the applicant in the alleged illegal trafficking of the contraband, this Court is of the view that the rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act are attracted. At this stage, no case for grant of bail is made out. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant – Mohd. Ahmed Ansari, involved in Crime No. 54/2025 registered at Police Station – Divisional Flying Scot Excise Division Surguja At Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 22(C) of the NDPS Act 1985, is rejected. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Vaibhav