1 CGHC010373042026 2026:CGHC:41495 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8952 of 2026 1 - Amit Kumar Tripathi S/o Late Rajdev Tripathi Aged About 36 Years R/o Bigahiya, Byur, Saidabad, Near Airtel Tower, Police Station - Handia, Prayagraj, Uttar Pradesh P.I.N. 221508 Presently R/o Ward No. 06, Jashpur Nagar, Police Station - Jashpur Nagar, District Jashpur, Chhattisgarh (Particulars Of The Applicant Is Mentioned Correctly And Father Name And Address Wrongly Mentioned In Order Impugned) ... Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station - Jashpur, District - Jashpur Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Anmol Sharma, Advocate For Non-applicant : Mr.Dharmesh Shrivastava, Dy. AG Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order On Board 24.09.2026 1) This is the second bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for grant of regular ball to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 74/2026 registered at Police Station Jashpur, District-Jashpur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 20(B) (ii)(c) and 2 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. Earlier first bail application bearing MCRC No.3197 of 2026 was rejected on merits vide order dated 11.05.2026. 2) The prosecution story, in brief, is that on 28.02.2026, 24 packets of ganja weighing 24.84 kilograms were recovered from the rented room of accused Ravi Vishwakarma. During custodial interrogation, he disclosed that co-accused Sunil alias Govinda had kept said ganja in his room and the present applicant had brought and handed over said ganja in his car. On the basis of the memorandum statement, the present applicant and co- accused Sunil Bhagat alias Govinda were arrested, and the documents relating to the vehicle were seized. Hence, the present bail application. 3) Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has falsely been implicated in the present case and no contraband was seized from his possession. It is further submitted that the entire 24.84 kilograms of ganja was recovered from the rented room of the main accused, Ravi Vishwakarma, and the applicant has been implicated only on the basis of his memorandum statement. The applicant has no criminal antecedents and the first bail application bearing MCRC No.3197 of 2026 was rejected on merits vide order dated 11.05.2026. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed, the applicant is in jail since 02.03.2026, and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the present applicant. 3 4) On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that 24.84 kilograms of ganja, which is more than commercial quantity, was seized from the rented room of the main accused. It is further submitted that the main accused, during custodial interrogation, disclosed the involvement of the present applicant in transporting and supplying the seized contraband. The documents relating to the vehicle allegedly used in the offence were also seized during investigation. Thus, considering the commercial quantity involved, the bar under Section 37 of the NDPS Act is attracted and the applicant is not entitled to bail. 5) I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6) It appears that contraband article i.e. 24.84 kg of Ganja was recovered from the possession of the co-accused, which is well above the commercial quantity. The co-accused persons have stated that the afore-stated contraband was being supplied to the present applicant, which indicates his prima facie involvement in the illegal transit and distribution of ganja, therefore, the rigour of Section 37 of the NDPS Act would squarely apply to the present case. Further, it is a well-settled principle of law that while considering a bail application, the High Court cannot conduct a mini-trial or undertake a detailed examination of the evidence. 7) Having considered the fact that the contraband seized is much 4 above the commercial quantity, the memorandum statement of the co-accused persons collected during investigation prima facie indicates involvement of the applicant in the present case. Further considering the allegations leveled against the present applicant, I am not inclined to allow this application. Accordingly, the instant bail application is rejected. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE Rekha