1 CGHC010177682026 2026:CGHC:32125 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4294 of 2026 Mohammad Naved Allies Nazim S/o Mohammad Haneef Aged About 31 Years R/o - Kota Road Suket Police Station Suket District Kota -(Rajasthan) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Officer Nagarnar, District - Bastar (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Prafulla N. Bharat, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Manish Nigam, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Palak Dwivedi, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 27.07.2026 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. 240/2025 registered at Police Station – Nagarnar, District – Bastar (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 20(b)ii(C) and Section 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 27.10.2025, acting on a secret information, the Police of Police Station Nagarnar intercepted a golden- brown Eicher truck bearing Registration No. MP-09-GH-4428, which was ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2026.07.29 16:50:15 +0530 2 allegedly proceeding from Odisha towards Jagdalpur. Upon inspection, the police recovered 73.080 kilograms of Ganja packed in eight bags from the said vehicle. The driver of the vehicle, namely, Murad Shah, was apprehended at the spot, and a case was registered against him for the offence punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(C) of the NDPS Act. During the course of the investigation, the co-accused, Murad Shah, made a memorandum statement alleging that he had contacted the present applicant, Mohammad Naved @ Nazim, pursuant to a prior plan. The prosecution further alleges that the applicant transferred an amount of Rs. 65,000/- through Phone Pe to the bank account of Haseena Bee, the mother of co-accused Murad Shah. It is also alleged in the said memorandum statement that the applicant had earlier paid a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- to Murad Shah. On the basis of the aforesaid alleged financial transactions and the allegation of criminal conspiracy, the applicant was arrested on 17.03.2026 and has been arraigned as an accused for the offence punishable under Section 29 of the NDPS Act. 3. Mr. Bharat, learned Senior Advocate submits that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in this case and the alleged contraband article i.e. 73.080 kilograms of Ganja was not seized from the possession of the present applicant. It is argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case solely on the basis of the memorandum statement of co-accused Murad Shah recorded under Section 23(2) of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, which has no substantive evidentiary value. The alleged financial transaction of Rs. 65,000/- through Phone Pe, as stated in the memorandum of the co-accused, has not been proved by the prosecution. On the contrary, the material available on record demonstrates that the applicant had transferred a sum of Rs. 15,000/- through UPI to the mother of co-accused Murad Shah towards 3 transportation charges for Kota stone in Rajasthan, as the applicant is engaged in the business of supplying Kota stone in Rajasthan. It is further argued that the prosecution has failed to establish any direct nexus between the said transaction and the alleged recovery of 73.080 kilograms of Ganja. There is no evidence to show that the said amount constituted either the sale consideration or an advance payment for the seized contraband. It is submitted that the twin conditions prescribed under Section 37 of the NDPS Act for the grant of bail are not attracted in the facts and circumstances of the present case, as no commercial quantity of contraband was recovered from the physical or conscious possession of the applicant. The entire recovery was effected from the possession of co-accused Murad Shah. The applicant is engaged in the business of supplying Kota stone, and financial transactions are a routine and integral part of his business. The mere existence of a bank transfer to a third party, namely, the mother of the co-accused, cannot by itself lead to the inference that the applicant financed illicit trafficking under Section 27A of the NDPS Act, particularly when the applicant has a legitimate source of income and the prosecution has failed to establish any connection between the said transaction and the alleged offence. It is further argued that the arrest of the present applicant is ante-dated. It is submitted that the present applicant has no criminal antecedents and he is in jail since 17.03.2026, and conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the present applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel appearing for the State opposes the bail application and submits that a commercial quantity of 73.080 kilograms of Ganja was seized during the course of investigation, and the present applicant's involvement surfaced in the memorandum statement of co-accused Murad Shah. She further submits that the 4 investigation revealed financial transactions between the applicant and the co-accused, and the transfer of Rs. 15,000/- by the applicant to the bank account of the mother of co-accused Murad Shah prima facie indicates the active role of the applicant in the alleged criminal conspiracy. She also submits that although the applicant has claimed to be engaged in the business of supplying stone, he has not placed on record any documentary evidence to substantiate the said claim. The facts indicate organized crime, therefore, the applicant is not entitled to bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing 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 fact that a commercial quantity of 73.080 kilograms of Ganja was seized, the specific role attributed to the present applicant, and the material collected during the course of investigation indicating his prima facie involvement in the alleged criminal conspiracy, including the transfer of an amount of Rs. 15,000/- by the applicant to the mother of co-accused Murad Shah. Moreover, the applicant has failed to place any documentary evidence on record to substantiate his claim that the said amount was transferred in connection with his alleged business of supplying stone. Although learned counsel for the applicant has contended during the course of arguments that the applicant's arrest is ante-dated, no specific averment to that effect has been made in the present bail application. Therefore, considering the seriousness of the allegations and the organized nature of the alleged offence, no case for grant of regular bail is made out. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant – Mohammad Naved Allies Nazi, involved in Crime No. 240/2025 registered at Police Station 5 – Nagarnar, District – Bastar (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 20(b)ii(C) and Section 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, 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/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Abhishek