1 CGHC010360242026 2026:CGHC:42614 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8686 of 2026 1 - Smt. Rajkumari Banjare W/o Late Pulchand Banjare Aged About 36 Years R/o Krishna Nagar Supela, Bhilai District Durg Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Komakhan, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh. ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Mahant Kumar Jaiswal, Advocate For Non-applicant : Mr. Sourabh Sahu, PL Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order On Board 30.09.2026 1) This is the second bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant, who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 19/2026, registered at Police Station Komakhan, District Mahasamund (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 20(b)(ii(C) of NDPS Act, 1985. Earlier first bail application of the applicant bearing MCRC No.7180 of 2026 was rejected on merits vide order dated 06.08.2026. 2 2) The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 03.02.2026, the police intercepted a grey scooter at Temri Check Post and recovered 24 kilograms of ganja concealed in two cartons from the possession of present applicant and co-accused Rajesh Kumar Chauhan. During investigation, on the basis of the memorandum statement of Rajesh Kumar Chauhan, it surfaced that he had contacted co-accused Kautuka Suna and Dhaneshwar Sahu for purchasing said ganja. Accordingly, they were also arrested and Crime No. 19/2026 was registered at Police Station Komakhan under Section 20(b)(ii)(C) of the NDPS Act. Hence, the bail application. 3) Learned counsel for the applicant submits that out of 24 kg. of ganja, only 12 kg. of ganja was seized from the possession of the applicant. It is further contended that the first bail application of the applicant was rejected on merits in M.Cr.C. No. 7180 of 2026 vide order dated 06.08.2026 and the applicant is in jail since 03.02.2026. He further submits that co-accused Dhaneshwar Sahu, who came to be implicated in the present case solely on the basis of the memorandum statement of co-accused Rajesh Kumar Chauhan, has already been enlarged on bail by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 16.07.2026 passed in SLP (Crl.) No. 10503/2026 (Dhaneshwar Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh). He would contend that the rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act are not attracted and the conclusion of the trial may take some time. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the present applicant. 4) On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the first bail application filed by the applicant was rejected on merits in M.Cr.C. No.7180 of 2026 vide order dated 3 06.08.2026. He would further submit that the plea of grant of bail to the co-accused by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP (Crl.) No. 10503/2026 (Dhaneshwar Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh) was considered in said order. He would submit that the allegations against the present applicant and the co-accused who has been enlarged on bail by the Hon’ble Supreme Court are distinguishable. He would contend that from the joint possession of the accused persons, a total of 24 kg. of ganja was seized. He would further contend that, in view of the statutory bar contained in Section 37 of the NDPS Act, the applicant is not entitled to be granted regular bail. 5) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6) Having considered the fact that the first bail application was rejected on merits in MCRC No.7180 of 2026 vide order dated 06.08.2026; the plea for grant of bail to the co-accused, who has been enlarged on bail by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP (Crl.) No. 10503 of 2026 (Dhaneshwar Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh), was also considered in said order; however, the case of the present applicant is distinguishable from that of said co-accused; and the total quantity of ganja seized from the joint possession of the accused persons and further considering the nature and quantity of the contraband involved, this Court finds that the rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act are attracted. In the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is not satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the applicant is not guilty of the alleged offence or that he is unlikely to commit any offence while on bail. Therefore, this Court is of the opinion that the applicant is 4 not entitled to be released on regular bail. 7) It is a well-settled principle of law that while considering bail, the court's role is confined to verifying the existence of a prima facie case and the recovery of contraband article from exclusive possession of present applicant indicates their prima facie involvement in the illegal transit of ganja, therefore, the rigour of Section 37 of the NDPS Act would squarely apply to the present case. 8) In view of the aforesaid discussion, I am not inclined to allow this application. Accordingly, the instant bail application is rejected. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE Rekha