1 CGHC010251332026 2026:CGHC:29319 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6196 of 2026 Rahul Kumar S/o Late Puran Das Aged About 20 Years R/o Village Ambedkarnagar Charcha P.S. Charcha, District- Korea C.G. (In The Copy Of The Order Sheet, The Word Late Mistakenly Omitted Before The Name Of The Puran Das) ... Applicant(s) versus The State Of Chhattisgarh Through S.H.O., P.S. Charcha, District Korea, C.G. ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Ghanshyam Sharma, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Ms. Ritika Verma, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 13/07/2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 106/2025 registered at Police Station AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN 2 Charcha, District Korea (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 22(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is on 19.05.2026, acting on a secret information, the police conducted a raid at Jamnipara Kharwat Tiraaha and apprehended the applicant while he was allegedly searching for customers to sell narcotic injections. During the search, the police allegedly recovered 20 Buprenorphine injections (40 ml) and 20 Avil injections (100 ml), constituting a commercial quantity under the NDPS Act, from his conscious possession. On the basis of the said recovery, the present crime was registered against the applicant for the alleged offence under Section 22(c) of the NDPS Act. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case, having no nexus with the alleged incident. He further submits that co-accused, Ramesh @ Nandau, has already been enlarged on bail and that charges under Section 22(c) of the NDPS Act have been framed against both the applicant and the co-accused, further the allegations against both accused persons are identical and, therefore, the applicant is also entitled to the benefit of parity. He also submits that the investigating agency has not conducted any investigation regarding the source from which the alleged narcotic injections were procured by the co-accused, nor has it collected any independent material connecting him with the alleged offence, 3 thereby demonstrating that the prosecution case against both accused persons stands on the same footing. He lastly submits that two independent prosecution witnesses have already turned hostile and have not supported the prosecution case during trial, which materially weakens the prosecution case and constitutes a change in circumstances warranting grant of bail to the applicant. The applicant is in jail since 19.05.2025 and the conclusion of the trial may take quite long time. Accordingly, he prays for enlarging the applicant on regular bail. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the State/non-applicant opposes the bail application and submit that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court. She further submits that the applicant was allegedly found in conscious possession of a commercial quantity of 20 Buprenorphine injections of 2 ml each (total 40 ml) and 20 Avil injections of 10 ml each (total 100 ml) for the purpose of illicit sale and was apprehended while allegedly searching for customers, therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. From perusal of the records, it prima facie appears that the charge- sheet has been filed in the present case and the contraband article seized i.e. 20 Buprenorphine injections of 2 ml each (total 40 ml) and 20 Avil injections of 10 ml each (total 100 ml) seized form the conscious possession of the applicant is much above the 4 commercial quantity as per the Schedule given under the NDPS Act, which was kept for the purpose of illicit sale, and the ground raised by the applicant that two of the independent witnesses have turned hostile, the same cannot be a ground for releasing the applicant on bail as the same amounts to only tampering with the evidence, the alleged recovery of commercial quantity narcotic substance indicates prima facie involvement of the applicant in the illicit trafficking of narcotic substances. 7. In view of the seriousness of the offence, I do not find any good ground to entertain the present bail application. 8. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant - Rahul Kumar, involved in Crime No. 106/2025 registered at Police Station Charcha, District Korea (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 22(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, is rejected. 9. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 10. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Akhil