1 CGHC010370352026 2026:CGHC:41658 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9010 of 2026  Kishan Singh S/o Late Mukhtar Singh Aged About 25 Years R/o Near Kaushal Furniture, Quarter No. 16, Zone 03, P.S. Khurshipar Bhilai District Durg Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus  State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer Police Station Khurshipar Bhilai District Durg Chhattisgarh. ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Gagan Tiwari, Advocate For Non-applicant : Mr. Sourabh Sahu, P.L. Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order On Board 25.09.2026 1) The applicant has preferred this Second Bail Application under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.02/2026, registered by Police Station Khushipar, District : Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 8, 21(b) and 27(a) of NDPS Act. Digitally signed by AJINKYA PANSARE Date: 2026.09.26 14:11:23 +0530 2 2) Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that On 02.01.2026 police received information that Mithilesh Pathak and Parmeshwar Thakur were at Mini Stadium, Dabrapara, planning to sell heroin. Police raided the location and seized contraband from both men. During questioning, the two admitted they were working for Rajji and Kishan Kumar (the applicant). They claimed Rajji and Kishan paid them to travel to Punjab, buy heroin, and bring it back to them. Following the memorandum statements, police searched Rajji and Kishan Kumar, seizing 18.370 grams of contraband along with cash. 3) Learned counsel for the applicant submits that there are total 12 accused persons and the applicant has been implicated solely on the basis of the memorandum statements of Mithilesh Pathak and Parmeshwar Thakur. He further submits that though the contraband was not seized from the exclusive possession of present applicant but earlier bail application i.e. MCRC/6745/2026 preferred by him was rejected vide order dated 27.07.2026 whereas 04 co-accused persons have been enlarged on bail. He also submits that applicant is in jail since 02.01.2026 and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays for grant of bail. 4) On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application. He submits that co-accused persons, namely, Rahul @ Gaurav Pathak, Randeep Singh and Mohd. Altaf were enlarged 3 on bail by the co-ordinate Bench vide orders dated 03.07.2026, 15.04.2026 and 17.06.2026 respectively, and the ground of parity was raised by the present applicant in the first bail application but the same was rejected on merits vide order dated 27.07.2026. 5) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6) Though, the contraband article was not seized from the exclusive possession of the present applicant but he was implicated on the basis of memorandum statements of co-accused persons. In the instant bail application, Mr. Tiwari has taken the ground of parity and stated that other co-accused persons have been enlarged on bail. 7) It is quite vivid that the co-accused persons were enlarged on bail by the co-ordinate Bench vide orders dated 03.07.2026, 15.04.2026 and 17.06.2026 whereas the first bail application of the applicant was rejected on merits vide order dated 27.07.2026. The ground of parity was available to the applicant and the same was raised before the co-ordinate Bench. However, learned Court proceeded to reject the bail application citing 03 live criminal antecedents including 01 antecedent under NDPS Act pertaining to year 2026. In view of the aforesaid, it is very much clear that the ground of parity was duly considered by the co-ordinate Bench while rejecting the first bail application preferred by the applicant. 4 8) Considering allegations leveled against the applicant coupled with the fact that earlier bail application preferred by the applicant has been rejected on merits vide order dated 27.07.2026, this Court is not inclined to extend the benefit of bail to the applicant at this stage. 9) Accordingly, the instant bail application is rejected. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE A j i n k y a