1 CGHC010283202026 2026:CGHC:33193 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6975 of 2026 1 - Satish Das S/o Mahesh Das Aged About 19 Years R/o Village Bnaras Road, Bhagvanpur, P.S. Gandhinagar Ambikapur, Tehsil Ambikapur District Surguja Chhattisgarh ... Applicant(s) versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through S H O P.S. Ambikapur Dehat (Gandhinagar) Tehsil Ambikapur, District Surguja Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Aditya Sharma, Advocate For Respondent(s)/State : Mr. Sourabh Sahu, P.L. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 31.07.2026 1. This is the first application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking grant of regular bail to the applicant, who is in judicial custody in connection with Crime No. 261/2025 registered at Police Station Ambikapur Dehat (Gandhinagar), Tehsil Ambikapur, District Surguja (Chhattisgarh), for the offence RUCHI YADAV Digitally signed by RUCHI YADAV 2 punishable under Section 20(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 27.04.2025, at about 12:30 P.M., Sub-Inspector Nawal Kishor Dubey, along with the police staff of Police Station Ambikapur Dehat (Gandhinagar), was on patrol duty near Verma Badi Ground, Godhanpur, when they noticed the applicant carrying a plastic bag and behaving suspiciously. On seeing the police, the applicant allegedly attempted to flee but was apprehended. Thereafter, in the presence of two independent witnesses, the plastic bag carried by the applicant was searched, from which 15 Rexogesic (Buprenorphine) Injection I.P. (2 ml each), totalling 30 ml, and 20 Avil (Pheniramine Maleate) Injection I.P. (10 ml each), totalling 200 ml, allegedly constituting commercial quantity, were recovered. As the applicant failed to produce any valid licence or doctor's prescription for possessing the said injections, the same were seized and the applicant was arrested. On the basis of the said seizure, the present FIR was registered against the applicant on 27.04.2025 for the aforesaid offence. After completion of the investigation, the charge-sheet has been filed. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel further submits that the applicant is 19 years of age, has no criminal antecedents, and has been in judicial custody since 27.04.2025. It is submitted that the investigation has been completed, the charge-sheet has already been filed, charges have been framed and 3 out of the 9 prosecution witnesses have already been examined before the learned 3 trial Court. It is further contended that the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude and that the applicant is not required for any further custodial interrogation. Therefore, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the applicant in further judicial custody. Accordingly, it is prayed that the applicant be enlarged on regular bail. 4. Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the contraband recovered from the possession of the applicant is of commercial quantity and, therefore, the rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act are attracted. It is contended that no case for grant of bail is made out. Accordingly, it is prayed that the bail application deserves to be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. Considering the nature and gravity of the allegations, the fact that the contraband allegedly recovered from the possession of the applicant is of commercial quantity, thereby attracting the rigours of Section 37 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the applicant at this stage. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present bail application is rejected. 7. The Director General of Police, Chhattisgarh, is directed to ensure that the remaining prosecution witnesses, particularly the seizure witnesses, remain present before the learned trial Court on the dates fixed for their examination. 8. The learned trial Court is directed to make every endeavour to 4 conclude the trial, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 9. The Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the learned trial Court as well as to the Director General of Police, Chhattisgarh, for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Ruchi