CGHC010311922026 2026:CGHC:36364 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7443 of 2026 Dharam Singh S/o Late Gend Singh Aged About 45 Years R/o Village Malda (B), Police Station Sarangarh, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh Chhattisgarh ...Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Dongripali, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh Chhattisgarh ... Respondent For Applicant : Ms. Neelam Soni, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Ankita Shukla, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 14.08.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 26/2026, registered at Police Station - Dongripali, District Sarangarh - Bilaigarh (C.G) for the offence punishable under Section 20(B) of the NDPS Act. VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.08.14 17:16:03 +0530 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the information received from the Mukhbir, the police of Police Station Dongripali, District Raigarh, intercepted the present applicant and seized 04 Kg of contraband substance (Ganja) from his possession. Accordingly, the offence was registered against the applicant under the relevant provisions of the NDPS Act, and after completion of the investigation, the case was proceeded with in accordance with law. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and has not committed any offence. It is further submitted that the seizure memo prepared by the prosecution is false and that the mandatory provisions of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 have not been duly complied with. Learned counsel further submits that, from the material collected during investigation, no offence is made out against the applicant and no prima facie case is established against him. It is also submitted that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, it is prayed that the applicant may kindly be released on bail. 4. Learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that, as per the case diary, one previous criminal case of a similar nature, i.e., Crime No. 29 of 2026, is pending against the applicant. It is contended that the repeated involvement of the applicant in similar offences shows his propensity to indulge in such activities and prima facie indicates that he is a habitual offender. Learned State Counsel further submits that, although the charge-sheet has been filed, the applicant is not entitled to bail in view of his criminal antecedents and the likelihood of his repeating a similar offence if released on bail, therefore applicant is not entitled for grant of regular bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and also taking into account the fact that one case is pending against the applicant under the NDPS Act, which clearly indicates that the applicant is a habitual offender, and further, in light of the judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Deepak Yadav v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Another, (2022) 8 SCC 559, wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court cancelled the bail granted to the accused on the ground of having previous criminal antecedents, this Court is of the considered opinion that the present case does not warrant the grant of regular bail to the applicant. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant – Dharam Singh, involved in with Crime No. 26/2026, registered at Police Station - Dongripali, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G) for the offence punishable under Section 20(B) of the NDPS Act, is rejected. 8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaibhav