Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 28524 (CHH)

DARSHAN SINGH v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

MCRC/6607/2026 · 2026-07-22

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 CGHC010271622026 2026:CGHC:31478 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6607 of 2026 Darshan Singh S/o Gurucharan Singh Aged About 45 Years R/o Gram Chhota Baans, Radaur, P.S. Radaur, District - Yamuna Nagar, Haryana ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Officer-In-Charge of Police Station Komakhan, District – Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Mohit Kumar, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Priyank Rathi, Government Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 23.07.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Crime No.40/2023, registered at Police Station - Komakhan, District- Mahasamund, (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Section 20(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, for short, the NDPS Act. 2. According to the prosecution case, in brief, on 10.04.2023, the police authorities received secret information, pursuant to which they intercepted and searched a two-wheeler. During the search, 150 kg of cannabis (ganja) was allegedly recovered from the possession of the present PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2026.07.23 17:48:47 +0530 2 applicant. Consequently, the present offence was registered against the applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the alleged narcotic substance or incriminating material has not been recovered or seized from the conscious possession of the present applicant. It is also submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case, the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents and the applicant has been in judicial custody since 10.04.2023. Since the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time, it is prayed that the applicants be enlarged on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed in the present case. He further submits that 150 kg of cannabis (ganja) was seized from the possession of the applicant, which is much above the commercial quantity under the NDPS Act. It is also submitted that the bail application of the co-accused, Aman Manchanda, has been rejected by this Court vide order dated 09.07.2026 passed in MCRC No. 4730/2026. Therefore, the applicant is not entitled to the grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the applicant, and the fact that the alleged contraband article i.e. 150 kg of cannabis (ganja) was seized from the possession of the applicant, which is much above the commercial quantity under the NDPS Act, and further considering that the applicant has failed to furnish any satisfactory 3 explanation regarding such possession, it cannot, at this stage, be said to be a case of false implication, also considering the fact that the bail application of the co-accused, Aman Manchanda, has been rejected by this Court vide order dated 09.07.2026 passed in MCRC No. 4730/2026, this Court is of the considered opinion that it is not a fit case for grant of bail. Accordingly, the bail application deserves to be and is hereby rejected. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of applicant – Darshan Singh, involved in Crime No.40/2023, registered at Police Station - Komakhan, District- Mahasamund, (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Section 20(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, for short, the NDPS Act, is rejected. 8. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 9. The Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Preeti