1 CGHC010265232026 2026:CGHC:30456 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6410 of 2026 Swaraj Kurre S/o Channu Kurre Aged About 20 Years R/o Mini Basti, Jarhabhata Police Station Civil Line Tahsil And District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Civil Line, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Rahul Goswami, Advocate For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Nupur Trivedi, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge Order on Board 17.07.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 165/2026, registered at Police Station- Civil Line, Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur, (C.G) for the offence punishable under Sections 21, 22 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and Section 25 of the Arms Act. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 31.01.2026, acting upon credible information received from an informer, the police personnel RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 of Police Station Civil Lines, Bilaspur, proceeded to the vicinity of Mini Basti, Jarhabhata, near Chhatru Gali Mod, Beat No. 03, within the jurisdiction of Police Station Civil Lines, Bilaspur (C.G.). During the course of the operation, the police intercepted a Jupiter Scooty bearing registration No. CG-10-CA-8764 and, upon conducting a search, recovered 119 strips containing a total of 1,190 tablets from the trunk (dickey) of the vehicle allegedly in the possession of the accused, Swaraj Kurre. As per the seizure proceedings, one tablet weighed approximately 0.55 grams and ten tablets weighed 7.00 grams, with the total recovered contraband weighing about 833 grams. During further search and investigation, one country-made iron pistol along with 20 live cartridges was also recovered from the possession of the accused. Consequently, the accused was taken into custody, arrested in accordance with law. Hence, this bail application. 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 neither committed nor been involved in any offence punishable under Sections 21, 22 and 29 of the NDPS Act or Section 25 of the Arms Act, and that the essential ingredients of the alleged offences are not attracted to the facts of the case. He further submits that the FIR has been registered without conducting a fair and proper enquiry and that the applicant has been implicated solely on the basis of false, fabricated and baseless allegations. It is argued that no reliable and independent evidence is available to connect the applicant with the alleged 3 offence and that the prosecution case is not supported by any independent eyewitness. The applicant has not acted in the manner alleged by the prosecution and has been unnecessarily roped into the case. With regard to the criminal antecedents attributed to the applicant, learned counsel submits that mere registration of previous cases cannot be treated as proof of guilt, particularly when the applicant has not been convicted in any of those matters and some of the cases are still pending trial. He also submits that the applicant is in jail since 31.01.2026, and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel appearing for the State/non-applicant opposes the bail application and submits that in the present case the charge-sheet has not been filed before the competent Court. She also submits that a substantial quantity of contraband tablets was recovered from the possession of the applicant and the seized narcotic substance falls above the prescribed commercial quantity, thereby attracting the rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act. It is further submitted that, during the course of investigation, one country-made pistol along with 20 live cartridges was also recovered from the possession of the applicant, which further aggravates the gravity of the offence. Learned State Counsel argues that the applicant is a habitual offender and has a criminal history of five antecedents, including previous cases registered under the NDPS Act and Arms Act. Significantly, one earlier case under Sections 21 and 22 of the NDPS Act and another 4 case under Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act are still pending trial against him, demonstrating his continued involvement in offences of a similar nature. In view of the serious allegations, recovery of commercial quantity of narcotic substance, pendency of similar offences, and the criminal antecedents of the applicant, there is every likelihood that, if released on bail, he may again indulge in criminal activities or misuse the liberty granted to him. Hence, learned State counsel prays for rejection of the bail application. 5. I have heard learned counsel 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 quantity of contraband recovered, and the material available on record, and further the record reveals that 1,190 tablets weighing approximately 833 grams were recovered from the possession of the applicant and the seized narcotic substance is stated to be above the prescribed commercial quantity, thereby attracting the stringent provisions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act. The prosecution case further discloses that, during search and investigation, one country-made pistol along with 20 live cartridges was also recovered from the possession of the applicant, which adds to the seriousness of the allegations. This Court also takes note of the fact that the applicant is a habitual offender having five criminal antecedents, including a previous case registered under Sections 21 and 22 of the NDPS Act and another case under Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, both of which are of a similar 5 nature and are stated to be pending trial. The existence of such antecedents prima facie indicates the applicant’s continued involvement in offences relating to narcotic substances and illegal possession of arms. In view of the gravity of the offence, the recovery of commercial quantity of contraband, the statutory restrictions contained in Section 37 of the NDPS Act, and the applicant’s criminal history involving similar offences, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant – Swaraj Kurre, involved in Crime No. 165/2026, registered at Police Station- Civil Line, Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur, (C.G) for the offence punishable under Sections 21, 22 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and Section 25 of the Arms Act, is rejected. 8. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge Rahul Dewangan