Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 32055 (CHH)

SANNI KUMAR SINGH v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

MCRC/7743/2026 · 2026-08-19

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 CGHC010313762026 2026:CGHC:37396 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7743 of 2026 Sanni Kumar Singh S/o Vijay Pratap Singh Aged About 19 Years R/o Village Sultanpur, Police Station-Banshadih, District- Ballia (Uttar Pradesh) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station- Nagarnar, District- Bastar (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Santosh Kumar Yadu, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Nupur Trivedi, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 20.08.2026 1. This is the First bail application 1led 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. 81/2025 registered at Police Station – Nagarnar, District-Bastar (C.G.), for the o:ence punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the Police of Police Station – Nagarnar, District-Bastar, (C.G.), had received secret information RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 from the informant and on the basis of the said information conducted a raid and seized total 23.546 Kgs of contraband Ganja from the joint possession of the present applicant along with co- accused persons. Thereafter, the Police has registered the o:ence punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, against the present applicant and co-accused persons. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant has have been falsely implicated in this case and the alleged contraband article was not recovered from the exclusive possession of the present applicant and no any contraband article has been seized from the applicant. He also submits that the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents, the charge-sheet has been submitted before the competent Court, he is in jail since 27.03.2025 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 opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the charge- sheet has been submitted before the competent Court. She further submits that the quantity of contraband article i.e. total 23.546 kgs Ganja from the joint possession of the present applicant along with co-accused persons, which is much above the commercial quantity. She further submits that the bail application of the co-accused person, namely Jairaj Singh has already been rejected by this Court in MCRC No. 2800/2026, vide order dated 25.03.2026, as such, the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail. 3 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and further the fact that the charge-sheet has been submitted before the competent Court and further the fact that the contraband article i.e. total 23.546 kgs Ganja has been seized from the joint possession of the present applicant and co-accused persons, is much above the commercial quantity and the applicant has failed to give any explanation for the same, further it cannot be a case of false implication. Further takes note of the fact that the bail application of the co-accused person, namely Jairaj Singh has already been rejected by this Court in MCRC No. 2800/2026, vide order dated 25.03.2026. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant – Sanni Kumar Singh, involved in Crime No. 81/2025 registered at Police Station – Nagarnar, District-Bastar (C.G.), for the o:ence punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(c) 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. ODce is directed to send a certi1ed copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan