1 CGHC010257722026 2026:CGHC:28921 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6173 of 2026 • Virendra Gandharv @ Birendra Gandharv @ Beeru S/o Jagannath Gandharv Aged About 45 Years R/o Sirsahi, Police Station Thelkadih, District Khairagarh-Chhuikhadan-Gandai Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus • State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Torwa, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant (Cause title taken from Case Information System) For Applicant : Mr. Dhirendra Prasad Mishra, Advocate. For State/Non-applicant : Mr. Shailendra Sharma, P.L. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 10.07.2026 1. This is the second bail application filed under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant, who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 309/2025 registered at Police Station Torwa, District Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(c) of the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985. 2. The first bail application of the applicant was rejected on merits by this Court vide order dated 19.02.2026 in MCRC No.1739/2026. 3. The prosecution's story in brief is that on the basis of secret DEEPTI JHA Digitally signed by DEEPTI JHA 2 information, police intercepted a car bearing No. CG/04/QC/4755 and allegedly recovered 284 kg of Ganja from the vehicle. Two persons present in the car were apprehended on the spot and the contraband was seized from their possession. The present Applicant was neither present at the place of seizure nor any contraband was recovered from him. His implication in the case is solely based on the memorandum statements of co-accused persons alleging that they were working for him. No discovery or recovery has been made from the Applicant pursuant to any such statement. Based on these allegations, the aforementioned offence has been registered against the present Applicant. Hence, this application. 4. Learned counsel for the Applicant submits that the Applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case for which, he is behind the bars since 27.12.2025. It is contended that no seizure has been made from the physical possession of the Applicant and his name has come into light only on the basis of the memorandum statement of the co-accused from whom, seizure of 284 kgs of contraband was made. He lastly submits that the Applicant has no previous criminal antecedents, charge sheet has been filed and conclusion of trial is likely to take considerable time, therefore, he may be released on bail. 5. Per contra, learned Counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submits that the present case pertains to organized crime and the Applicant has already been charge-sheeted during the course of trial. It is further submitted that the name of the Applicant appears in the Criminal Record Report (CRR), indicating criminal antecedents. Therefore, considering the nature and gravity of the offence as well as 3 the criminal history of the Applicant. He further submits that SLP No.8056/2026 filed by the applicant is also rejected by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, therefore, the present bail application deserves to be rejected. 6. Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Considering the nature and gravity of the allegations, the fact that the offence is stated to be part of an organized crime, that the Applicant has already been charge-sheeted during the course of trial and further taking note of the submission of learned State Counsel that the name of the Applicant appears in the Criminal Record Report (CRR) indicating criminal antecedents. Further considering the fact that SLP No.8056/2026 filed by the applicant is also rejected by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, this Court is not inclined to grant regular bail to the present Applicant at this stage. 8. Accordingly, this first bail application of applicant – Virendra Gandharva @ Beeru involved in Crime No. 309/2025 registered at Police Station Torwa, District Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(c) of the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985, is rejected at this stage. 9. Needless to say that the learned trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed with the trial and conclude the same, expeditiously. 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 Deepti Jha