1 CGHC010301522026 2026:CGHC:36569 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7552 of 2026 1 - Pawan Shivhare S/o Shri Ramprakash Shivhare Aged About 33 Years R/o Mohalla Rajendra Nagar, Hanuman Chauraha, P.S. Urai, District Jalaun Uttar Pradesh. 2 - Shyam Shivhare S/o Shri Ramprakash Shivhare Aged About 40 Years R/o Mohalla Rajendra Nagar, Hanuman Chauraha, P.S. Urai, District Jalaun Uttar Pradesh. ... Applicants versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House O-cer, Police Station - Singhoda, Mahasamund Chhattisgarh. ... Non-Applicant For Applicants : Mr. Shashikant Chauhan, Advocate For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Saurabh Sahu, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 17.08.2026 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 applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 97/2025 registered at Police Station – Singhoda, Mahasamund, District - Mahasamund (C.G.), for the o<ence punishable under Sections 20(B) and 29(1) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 24.12.2025, the police personnel of Police Station Singhoda were conducting patrolling in a Bolero vehicle bearing registration No. C.G.03 A 1086. Upon reaching Village Chivrakuta, the patrolling party received secret information that a silver-coloured Tata Zest car bearing registration No. U.P.92 S 1313, travelling from Odisha towards Chhattisgarh, was being used for transportation of illegal contraband Ganja. The information was communicated to the SDOP, Saraipali through mobile phone. Thereafter, when the patrolling party reached NH-53 at Village Rahtikhol, the said Tata Zest car was intercepted. On being questioned, the driver disclosed his name as Kushal Singh. Upon being asked about two plastic du<el bags, one kept on the rear seat and the other in the dickey of the vehicle, the driver initially gave evasive answers; however, upon further questioning, he allegedly disclosed that the bags contained contraband Ganja, which was being transported from Odisha to Jalaun, Uttar Pradesh. Thereafter, two independent witnesses, namely Balram Miri and Mahesh Miri, who were present at Murmuri Chowk, were served notices to assist in the search and seizure proceedings. Upon search of the vehicle, two plastic du<el bags, one from the rear seat and another from the dickey, were allegedly found containing a total quantity of 50 kilograms of Ganja, which was seized by the police and the requisite seizure panchnama was prepared. Hence, the bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is 3 submitted that the applicants were not named in the FIR and their names came to be introduced subsequently only on the basis of the memorandum statement of co-accused Raghuvendra Rajput @ Raghuvendra Singh. It is further submitted that the applicants were neither apprehended at the spot nor were they present in the vehicle allegedly used for transportation of the contraband, and no incriminating article or contraband has been recovered from their possession or at their instance. There is no direct or independent evidence connecting the applicants with the alleged o<ence, and the material collected during investigation is not prima facie su-cient to establish their involvement. He further submits that though the present applicants have 01 criminal antecedent under the NDPS Act in the State of Uttar Pradesh, which is pending, charge-sheet has been submitted before the competent Court and they are in jail since 20.02.2026 and conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the present applicants. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been 1led in the present case before the competent Court. He submits that the allegations against the applicants are serious in nature and relate to the illegal transportation of 50 kilograms of Ganja, a commercial quantity of contraband. It is submitted that the names of the applicants have surfaced during the course of investigation in the memorandum statement of co-accused Raghuvendra Rajput @ Raghuvendra Singh, and their role in the transportation of the 4 contraband is subject to investigation and trial. He further submits that the applicants have one criminal antecedent under the provisions of the NDPS Act in the State of Uttar Pradesh, which is presently pending. Therefore, considering the nature and gravity of the o<ence, the commercial quantity of contraband involved, the material collected during investigation and the criminal antecedent of the applicants, it is prayed that the bail application be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, the material available on record, and further the fact that the prosecution case relates to the alleged transportation of 50 kilograms of Ganja, which constitutes a commercial quantity, and the names of the applicants have surfaced during the course of investigation in the memorandum statement of co-accused Raghuvendra Rajput @ Raghuvendra Singh. Though the applicants were not apprehended from the spot and no contraband has been recovered from their possession, but the material collected during investigation indicates their alleged involvement, which requires due consideration at the stage of trial. It is further signi1cant that each of the applicants has a previous criminal antecedent under the provisions of the NDPS Act in the State of Uttar Pradesh, which is presently pending, which shows that the applicants are involved in such o<ences and is a habitual o<ender, and also in light of the judgment rendered by the Supreme Court in Deepak Yadav v. 5 State of Uttar Pradesh & Another, reported in (2022) 8 SCC 559, wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court had cancelled the bail granted to the accused therein on the ground that the accused had previous antecedents, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a 1t case to enlarge the applicants on regular bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicants – Pawan Shivhare and Shyam Shivhare, involved in Crime No. 97/2025 registered at Police Station – Singhoda, Mahasamund, District - Mahasamund (C.G.), for the o<ence punishable under Sections 20(B) and 29(1) 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. O-ce 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