1 CGHC010299262026 2026:CGHC:34211 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7138 of 2026 Mohit Malekar @ Montu S/o Radhelal Malekar Aged About 35 Years R/o Jail Road, Ward No. 21 P.S. Dongargarh, Distt. Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through S H O, P.S. Dongargarh Distt. Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Pranav Tiwari, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Palak Dwivedi, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 05.08.2026 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. 210/2026, registered at Police Station - Dongargarh Distt. Rajnandgaon (C.G) for the offence punishable under Section 20(b) of the NDPS Act. VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.08.06 17:54:03 +0530 2 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 23.04.2026, Sub- Inspector Dhannalal Sinha, posted at Police Station Dongargarh, received a confidential tip-off that Mohit Malekar Montu, who illegally possesses and sells ganja (cannabis), gives ganja to people and children who come to his house. He has gone to Bortalav, Maharashtra, on a motorcycle to procure ganja and is on his way back. If the location is reached immediately, he can be caught along with the contraband. If there is delay, there is a possibility that the ganja will be destroyed/disposed of. A cordon (blockade/surveillance) was set up near Jail Road, Dongargarh. After some time, the suspects Mohit Malekar@ Montu and Karan Mandavi were apprehended on a black motorcycle. Following this, a search was conducted of a black-colored bag in his possession, inside which 5 kg 610 grams of ganja was seized. Accordingly, the case was registered and investigation initiated. The applicant has been arrested for the commission of alleged offences. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case and has no direct nexus with the alleged contraband, while the alleged recovery of 5 kg 610 grams of ganja is highly doubtful and has been falsely planted. It is further submitted that the quantity seized falls within the intermediate quantity, as the small quantity of ganja is 1 kg and the commercial quantity is 20 kg, therefore, the rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act are not 3 attracted and the bail application is liable to be considered on the ordinary principles governing grant of bail under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023. Learned counsel further submits that the co- accused, namely Heera Lal Verma, has already been granted regular bail by this Hon’ble Court vide order dated 01.07.2026 passed in MCRC No. 5802 of 2026, and the applicant is entitled to similar treatment. It is also submitted that the investigation is complete and charge-sheet has already been filed, hence no further custodial interrogation of the applicant is required. The applicant is the sole breadwinner of his family, has deep roots in society, is a permanent resident of the address mentioned in the cause title, and there is no likelihood of his absconding or tampering with the prosecution evidence or influencing the witnesses. The applicant is ready to furnish adequate security and abide by all the conditions that may be imposed by this Hon’ble Court; therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the applicant may kindly be enlarged on regular bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel appearing for the State/non-applicant opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court. It is further submitted that the present applicant has as many as twelve criminal antecedents, which are as follows: (i) FIR No. 446/2015, registered in the year 2015 for offences under Section 25 of the Arms Act and Sections 294 and 506 of the IPC; 4 (ii) FIR No. 218/2017, registered in the year 2017 for offences under Sections 380, 454, 457 and 34 of the IPC; (iii) FIR No. 240/2017, registered in the year 2017 for an offence under Section 379 of the IPC; (iv) FIR No. 247/2021, registered in the year 2021 for offences under Sections 380, 427 and 457 of the IPC; (v) FIR No. 239/2021, registered in the year 2021 for offences under Sections 380 and 457 of the IPC; (vi) FIR No. 2/2021, registered in the year 2021 for offences under Sections 294, 323, 324 and 34 of the IPC; (vii) FIR No. 816/2022, registered in the year 2022 for an offence under Section 20(b) of the NDPS Act; (viii) FIR No. 218/2021, registered in the year 2021 for offences under Sections 380 and 457 of the IPC; (ix) FIR No. 626/2023, registered in the year 2023 for offences under Sections 323, 392 and 394 of the IPC; (x) FIR No. 454/2024, registered in the year 2024 for offences under Sections 119(1), 296, 351(2) and 3(5) of the BNS; (xi) FIR No. 200/2025, registered in the year 2025 for an offence under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act; and (xii) FIR No. 145/2025, registered in the year 2025 for offences under Sections 296, 351(2), 118(1) and 115(2) of the BNS. It is particularly submitted that one of the aforesaid criminal cases is registered under Section 20(b) of the NDPS Act and is still pending before the competent Court. Learned State Counsel submits that the aforesaid repeated involvement of the applicant in as many as twelve criminal cases, including an offence under the NDPS Act, 5 clearly indicates that the applicant is a habitual offender and has a propensity to indulge in criminal activities. It is further contended that, if released on bail, there is every likelihood of the applicant repeating similar offences and misusing the liberty granted to him, thereby adversely affecting public peace and order. Therefore, considering the gravity and nature of the allegations, the extensive criminal antecedents of the applicant, including his previous involvement in an NDPS case, and the likelihood of repetition of similar offences and misuse of liberty, the applicant is not entitled to the discretionary relief of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the applicant, and further taking into consideration the fact that the applicant has as many as twelve criminal antecedents, out of which one case registered under Section 20(b) of the NDPS Act is presently pending, this Court is of the considered opinion that the repeated involvement of the applicant in criminal activities, including his previous involvement in an offence under the NDPS Act, indicates his propensity to indulge in criminal activities and prima facie reflects that he is a habitual offender. Further, in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Deepak Yadav v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Another, (2022) 8 SCC 559, wherein the criminal antecedents of the accused were taken into 6 consideration while examining the grant of bail, this Court is not inclined to exercise its discretionary jurisdiction in favour of the applicant. Having regard to the extensive criminal antecedents of the applicant, including his involvement in a previous NDPS case, and the likelihood of repetition of similar offences and misuse of the liberty of bail, this Court is of the considered opinion that the present case does not warrant grant of regular bail to the applicant. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant – Mohit Malekar @ Montu, involved in Crime No. 210/2026, registered at Police Station - Dongargarh Distt. Rajnandgaon (C.G) for the offence punishable under Section 20(b) of the NDPS Act, is rejected. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Vaibhav