1 CGHC010199232026 2026:CGHC:28417 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4936 of 2026 Kaal Bahadur @ Kaale S/o Late Shri Khadak Bahadur Aged About 34 Years R/o Shivaji Ward, Sagar, District- Sagar (M.P.) ...Applicant versus Union Of India Through The Officer Of Narcotics Control Bureau, Regional Unit, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) (Correctly Mentioned As Per Final Report/complaint) ...Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Khilendra Sahu, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Ramakant Mishra, learned Deputy Solicitor General. 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. 02/2025 registered at Police Station – Narcotics Control Bureau, Regional Unit, Raipur, District- Raipur(C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 20(B)(ii)C, & 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.07.10 11:02:46 +0530 2 Act, 1985. 2. The prosecution story in brief, is that, on 30.03.2025 the Police of Police Station Bortalab District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) received secret information that contraband articles are being transported in a car bearing number CG 10 BQ 0634. Based upon the above information the police raided the place of incident and stopped the vehicle and conducted search of the said vehicle, whereby the co-accused persons were found carrying contraband articles. Total 243.54 Kg Ganja was seized from the possession of the co-accused namely Dilawar Ali and Santosh Pal. That, the one other accused namely Sheikh Amir had fled from the spot who was later arrested by the police. Therefore, offence under the NDPS Act was registered against the present applicant. That the present case was initially registered at Police Station Bortalab, District Rajnandgaon,where the local police arrested the co-accused persons, who allegedly disclosed the name of the present applicant in their memorandum statements. Thereafter, the Narcotics Control Barema, Zonal Unit Raipur, got involved in the matter and arrested two other accused persons. Subsequently, the investigation was taken over by the Narcotics Control Bureau and the final report has been filed by the said agency. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and that no contraband has been recovered from his conscious and exclusive possession. It is contended that the applicant has been arraigned solely on the basis of the memorandum statement of the co-accused, Santosh Pal, and except for the said statement, there is no independent, cogent or 3 legally admissible material connecting him with the alleged offence. It is further submitted that the mandatory provisions and procedural safeguards under the NDPS Act have not been complied with, thereby rendering the search and seizure doubtful. The applicant was merely accompanying the co-accused and neither the alleged contraband belonged to him nor was any recovery effected from his possession. Learned counsel further submits that the applicant is presently on interim bail granted by the learned Trial Court on medical grounds, as he sustained serious injuries in a road accident, underwent surgery on his leg, and is still undergoing treatment as advised by the attending doctor. It is also submitted that the applicant has remained in judicial custody since 07.06.2025 and, despite prolonged incarceration, only 3 out of 21 prosecution witnesses have been examined, indicating that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time. The delay is not attributable to the applicant, and there is no likelihood of his absconding, tampering with the prosecution evidence or influencing the witnesses. Therefore, it is prayed that the applicant be enlarged on bail. 4. Learned State Counsel opposed the bail application and submitted that the applicant is involved in a serious offence under the provisions of the NDPS Act involving recovery of a commercial quantity of contraband Ganja. It is submitted that acting upon credible secret information, the police intercepted the vehicle in question and recovered 243.54 kilograms of Ganja concealed in 8 plastic sacks containing 234 packets. The contraband was being transported in the vehicle pursuant to a well-planned criminal conspiracy. The investigation has revealed the involvement of the present applicant along with the other co- accused in the illegal transportation and trafficking of the contraband. It 4 is further submitted that the offences alleged against the applicant are punishable under Sections 20(b)(ii)(C), 25 and 29 of the NDPS Act, which attract the stringent embargo contained under Section 37 of the NDPS Act. Learned State Counsel further submits that the applicant is a habitual offender and has six criminal antecedents, which clearly indicate his criminal propensity and disentitle him from claiming the discretionary relief of bail. It is contended that in view of the recovery of commercial quantity of contraband, the applicant's criminal antecedents, and the statutory restrictions under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, there are no reasonable grounds for believing that the applicant is not guilty of the alleged offences or that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. Therefore, considering the gravity and seriousness of the offence, the quantity of contraband seized, the applicant's criminal antecedents, and the rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, the applicant is not entitled to the discretionary relief of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the case diary, this Court is of the considered opinion that a commercial quantity, i.e., 243.54 kilograms of Ganja, has been recovered from the intercepted vehicle. The allegations prima facie disclose the involvement of the applicant in the transportation of the contraband in furtherance of a criminal conspiracy. The offences alleged against the applicant are punishable under Sections 20(b)(ii)(C), 25 and 29 of the NDPS Act and are governed by the stringent rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act. At this stage, this Court does not find any reasonable 5 ground to believe that the applicant is not guilty of the alleged offences or that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. It is also noticed that the applicant has one criminal antecedent involving an offence under the NDPS Act, which is still pending consideration before the competent Court, and the same also weighs against the grant of bail. Considering the nature and gravity of the allegations, the recovery of commercial quantity of contraband, the applicant's criminal antecedent, and the statutory embargo contained under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, this Court is not inclined to extend the benefit of bail to the applicant. Accordingly, the bail application deserves to be and is hereby rejected. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant – Kaal Bahadur @ Kaale, involved in Crime No. 02/2025 registered at Police Station – Narcotics Control Bureau, Regional Unit, Raipur, District- Raipur(C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 20(B)(ii)C, & 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, is rejected. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Vaibhav