1 2026:CGHC:16408 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3219 of 2026 Shubham Dutta Valmiki S/o Sanjay Dutta Aged About 27 Years R/o Shahbad Mohammadpur Sector 21, House No. 99, Gali No. 1, Police Station Dwarika District- North Delhi (India) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House O6cer, Police Station- Civil Lines, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Rajendra Patel, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Monika Thakur, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 09.04.2026 1. This is the second bail application ;led under Section 483 of the BNSS for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 542/2025 registered at Police Station - Civil Lines, District- Bilaspur, (C.G.), for the o>ence punishable under Section 21 and 29 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act. 2. The earlier bail application of the applicant being MCRC No. 7856 of 2025 was rejected by this Court vide order dated 06.10.2025 on the ground that the applicant has one previous criminal antecedent RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 under the NDPS Act. 3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 14.05.2025, Police Station Civil Line, Bilaspur, acting on information received from the informant, recovered 7.620 grams of MDMA from the possession of co-accused Pradeep at Uslapur Railway Station near the motorcycle stand under a neem tree. During investigation, the statement of co-accused Pradeep was recorded wherein he stated that he had received the said contraband from the present applicant on 28.04.2025 for delivering it to another person. On the basis of the said statement, the present applicant, who was already in custody in Crime No. 327/2025 since 17.05.2025, was implicated in the present case and was formally arrested on 05.07.2025. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet has been ;led before the concerned Special Court. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that this is the second bail application of the applicant and the earlier bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Hon’ble Court. He further submits that the co-accused Pradeep Kumar, from whom the alleged recovery has been made, has already been enlarged on bail by this Hon’ble Court vide order dated 28.01.2026 passed in MCRC No. 9637/2025. It is further submitted that the applicant was formally arrested on 05.07.2025 and there has been no substantial progress in the trial as out of 18 witnesses only one witness namely Mahesh Singh Dhurwe, Constable has been examined till date and the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude. It is also submitted that the applicant has been implicated only on the basis of 3 memorandum statement of co-accused Pradeep Kumar and there is no independent or cogent evidence connecting him with the alleged o>ence. It is further submitted that the applicant was already in custody in another case bearing Crime No. 327/2025 registered at Police Station Ratanpur since 17.05.2025 and in the present case, the FIR was registered on 14.05.2025 in which the co-accused had named one “Shubham” and after about two months, without any proper identi;cation or investigation, the present applicant has been implicated merely on the basis of similarity of name without establishing any connection or communication between them. It is also submitted that there is no recovery from the present applicant in the instant case and he has already been enlarged on bail in the earlier case. It is further submitted that the applicant has remained in custody for more than 10 months and the alleged seizure from the co-accused is of less than commercial quantity. It is also submitted that the prosecution story is doubtful as per the statement of co-accused, the contraband was allegedly given on 28.04.2025 and recovered after about 17 days, which creates serious doubt. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has already been ;led and there is no likelihood of tampering with the evidence and except the memorandum statement of co-accused, there is no material against the applicant, therefore the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the applicant 4 has one criminal antecedent bearing Crime No. 327/2025 registered at Police Station Ratanpur, District Bilaspur for o>ences under Sections 21 and 29 of the NDPS Act, in which he has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 17.09.2025 passed in MCRC No. 6470/2025. It is further submitted that the present case as well as the earlier case are registered under the NDPS Act at two di>erent police stations and though no recovery has been made from the present applicant in this case, his involvement appears in both matters, which indicates that he is a habitual o>ender. It is also submitted that considering the criminal antecedents and nature of allegations, the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. From the perusal of the record, it transpires that the earlier bail application of the applicant being MCRC No. 7856 of 2025 was rejected by this Court vide order dated 06.10.2025 on the ground that the applicant has one previous criminal antecedent under the NDPS Act and the new ground for ;ling of the second bail application is that the applicant was already in custody in another case bearing Crime No. 327/2025 registered at Police Station Ratanpur since 17.05.2025 and in the present case, the FIR was registered on 14.05.2025 in which the co-accused had named one “Shubham” and after about two months, without any proper identi;cation or investigation, the present applicant has been 5 implicated merely on the basis of similarity of name without establishing any connection or communication between them and further as per the status of the trial out of 18 witnesses only one witness namely Mahesh Singh Dhurwe, Constable has been examined till date and the applicant is in jail since 05.07.2025 and the applicant has remained in custody for more than 10 months and the alleged seizure from the co-accused is of less than commercial quantity and the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude, but the same cannot be a ground for releasing the applicant on bail, the applicant has one criminal antecedent bearing Crime No. 327/2025 registered at Police Station Ratanpur, District Bilaspur for o>ences under Sections 21 and 29 of the NDPS Act, which is pending, shows that the applicant is 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. 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 ;t case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. 8. 8. Accordingly, the second bail application of the applicant – Shubham Dutta Valmiki, involved in Crime No. 542/2025 registered at Police Station - Civil Lines, District- Bilaspur, (C.G.), for the o>ence punishable under Section 21 and 29 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, is rejected. 6 9. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 10. O6ce is directed to send a certi;ed copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan