1 2026:CGHC:955 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 36 of 2026 Avinash Mhaske S/o Gyaneshwar Mhaske Aged About 27 Years Occupation Driver, R/o Bhilpuri Khurd, Police Station Badnapur, District Jalna, State Maharashtra. ... Applicant versus The State of Chhattisgarh Through Singhora Police Station District Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Aakash V. Bagal, Advocate appearing through video conferencing. For Respondent/State : Ms. Ankita Shukla, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 07.01.2026 1. This is the second bail application 6led under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 20/2024 registered at Police Station Singhora, District Mahasamund (C.G.) for the o;ence punishable under Section 20(B) of N.D.P.S Act, 1985. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the applicant is a permanent resident of the above-mentioned address. Crime No. 20/2024 was registered at Police Station Singhoda, District Mahasamund, on ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2026.01.09 12:10:07 +0530 2 02.03.2024 at the instance of ASI Sanatan Behera for the o;ence punishable under Section 20(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, against the present applicant. According to the prosecution story, the informant ASI Sanatan Behera was posted at Police Station Singhoda. On 02.03.2024, he along with constables No. 933, 799, 517, 830 and 785, using a police-acquired vehicle bearing registration No. CG-04-PL-2687, left for rural patrolling for the purpose of investigation of crimes, checking illegal drugs and conducting raid action. While patrolling near village Murmuri, the informant received secret information that two persons were coming from Odisha to Chhattisgarh carrying ganja in an ochre-coloured Mazda truck bearing registration No. MH-21-BH-5855. After receiving the said information, the informant duly intimated the SDOP, Saraipali, and thereafter proceeded to create a blockade on NH-53 Road near village Rehtikhol. After some time, an ochre-coloured Mazda truck bearing No. MH-21-BH-5855 was spotted coming from the direction as informed. The said vehicle was stopped. On seeing the police party, the driver attempted to Cee but was chased and apprehended by the accompanying sta;. On enquiry, the driver admitted that ganja was loaded in the vehicle and stated that it was being transported from Sonpur, Odisha to Dhule, Maharashtra. 3. Upon interrogation, the driver disclosed his name as Avinash Mhaske, son of Gyaneshwar Mhaske, aged about 27 years, resident of Bhilpuri Khurd, Police Station Badnapur, District Jalna, Maharashtra. The person seated next to him disclosed his name as Santosh Pawar, son of Bhimrao Pawar, aged about 32 years, resident of Banjar Umrad, Police Station Jalna, District Jalna, Maharashtra. Independent witnesses Sujeet Sahu and Gusharnani Pradhan were called on the spot and were served notices under Section 160 CrPC. An informer information panchnama 3 and a panchnama of search without warrant were prepared in the presence of witnesses. Proceedings under the NDPS Act were initiated, and notices under Section 50 of the NDPS Act were served upon the accused persons, and their consent for search was obtained. Thereafter, the police party searched the vehicle. During the search, 69 plastic sacks containing moist narcotic substance resembling ganja were recovered from the rear portion of the truck. The packets were opened, examined, and identi6ed as ganja by smell, texture, and appearance. A drug identi6cation panchnama was prepared on the spot. A weigher, Pankaj Gupta, was summoned to the spot and the weighing scale was physically veri6ed. Upon weighing, the recovered ganja was found to be 1725 kilograms. Both accused persons were arrested on 02.03.2024, the applicant was produced before the concerned Court and was initially granted police custody remand, followed by magisterial custody. The applicant is presently in judicial custody since the date of arrest. The copy of FIR bearing Crime No. 20/2024 is already on record before this Hon’ble Court. 4. The 6rst bail application of the applicant was rejected on merits by this Court vide order dated 14.01.2025 passed in MCRC No. 326/2025. Subsequently, the applicant approached the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, but the bail application was dismissed vide order dated 06.03.2025 passed in SLP (Crl.) No. 3180/2025. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that this is the second bail application of the applicant and the 6rst bail application was rejected on merits by this Court in MCRC No. 326/2025 on 14.01.2025. He would submit that the applicant is in jail since 02.03.2024, charge sheet has been 6led and out of 15 prosecution witnesses, evidence of only 1 prosecution witnesses have been recorded, conclusion of the trial may 4 take some time, therefore, he prays for releasing the applicant on regular bail. 6. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 8. From perusal of the records, it transpires that this is the second bail application of the applicant and the 6rst bail application was rejected on merits by this Court in MCRC No. 326/2025 on 14.01.2025. The contraband article which was recovered from an ochre-coloured Mazda truck bearing No. MH-21-BH-5855 was above the commercial quantity in which the applicant and co-accused were found sitting, further the ground which has been raised in this second bail application is that the applicant is in jail since 02.03.2024 and out of 15 prosecution witnesses, evidence of only 1 prosecution witnesses have been recorded. 9. Recently the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Union of India (UOI) Vs. Vigin K. Varghese (Special Leave Petition (Cri.) Nos.7768 of 2025 and 11097 of 2025) decided on 13.11.2025 has observed that in NDPS commercial-quantity cases, long incarceration cannot, by itself, be a ground for bail. 10. Considering the fact that the 6rst bail application of the applicant was rejected on merits by this Court, further the fact that trial is in progress and also in the light of observation made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Vigin K. Varghese (supra) that in NDPS commercial-quantity cases, long incarceration cannot, by itself, be a ground for bail, therefore I do not 6nd any good ground to entertain this second bail application. Accordingly, the second bail application of the applicant- Avinash Mhaske, involved in Crime No. 20/2024 registered at Police Station Singhora, District Mahasamund (C.G.) for the o;ence punishable under 5 Section 20(B) of N.D.P.S Act, 1985, is rejected. 11. OGce is directed to send a certi6ed copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Abhishek