Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 37024 (CHH)

RAKESH VERMA v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

MCRC/8993/2026 · 2026-09-24

Shri Rakesh Mohan Pandey

Criminal Appealbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 CGHC010372852026 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8993 of 2026 1 - Rakesh Verma S/o Rupu Verma Aged About 34 Years R/o Khapridih Khurd Police Station Kharora, District Raipur C.G. Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer Police Station Kharora District Raipur C.G. Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Satya Prakash Verma, Advocate For Non-applicant : Ms. Soumya Sharma, PL 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 the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), in connection with Crime No. 308/2025, registered at Police Station Kharora, District Raipur (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Section 20(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, “the NDPS Act”). Earlier first bail application bearing MCRC No.752 of 2026 was rejected on merits vide order dated 21.01.2026. 2 2) The prosecution story, in brief, is that on 20.05.2025, Police of Police Station Kharora received secret information from the informant that accused Mohan Singh Koshle @ Rakesh was in illegal possession of cannabis. Acting upon the information, the police conducted a raid and recovered 27.894 kg of cannabis from his possession. During investigation, his memorandum statement was recorded, on the basis of which the present applicant was implicated and arrested. Hence, this bail application. 3) Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that similarly situated co-accused Mohan Singh Koshle has already been enlarged on bail by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Criminal Appeal No. 4440 of 2026 @ SLP (Cr.) No. 17846 of 2026 vide order dated 18.09.2026. It is further submitted that the name of the present applicant surfaced in the memorandum statements of the other co-accused persons. He would contend that the applicant was not involved in the commission of the alleged offence, no contraband was seized from his possession, and he has no criminal antecedents. He would, therefore, pray for grant of bail to the applicant. 4) On the other hand, learned State counsel would oppose the bail application and would submit that a huge quantity of cannabis, i.e., 27.894 kg, which is much above the commercial quantity, has been seized from the possession of co-accused Mohan Singh Koshle @ Rakesh. It is further submitted that the present applicant was implicated during investigation on the basis of the memorandum statement of said co-accused. Learned State counsel would also submit that the charge-sheet has already been filed and, therefore, the 3 applicant is not entitled to be enlarged on bail. 5) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material case diary. 6) Having considered the fact that similarly situated co-accused has already been enlarged on bail by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Criminal Appeal No. 4440 of 2026 @ SLP (Cr.) No. 17846/2026 vide order dated 18.09.2026, and further considering that the charge-sheet has been filed, the applicant is in jail since 17.11.2025, and the likelihood of the trial taking considerable time to conclude, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that it is a fit case to allow the application. Accordingly, the application is allowed. 7. It is directed that in the event of the applicant executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- (i) he shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such fact to the Court; (ii) he shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial, & (iii) he shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial. 4 The observation made hereinabove is for the purpose of deciding this bail application only, the learned trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits. Sd/- Rekha (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE