1 2026:CGHC:17260 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2014 of 2026 1 - Mohd. Nafees S/o Shri Safiq Ali Aged About 35 Years R/o Meeratola Kannoj Police Station - Kannoj Tahsil - Kannoj District- Kannoj (Uttar Pradesh) 2 - Aaqeeb Ahmed S/o Julfikar Ahmed Aged About 19 Years R/o Fatehpur Kachari Mati, Police Station - Akbarpur District- Kanpur (Uttar Pradesh) Present Address- Bishunpur Meeratola Kannoj Police Station - Kannoj Tahsil- Kannoj District- Kannoj (Uttar Pradesh) ... Applicants versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- S.H.O. Police Station Lohandiguda, District – Bastar (C.G.) ---- Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Gyan Prakash Shukla, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Ritika Verma, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 15.04.2026 1. The applicants have preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in connection with Crime No.44/2025, registered at Police Station- Lohandiguda, District – Bastar (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Sections 20(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, for short, the NDPS Act. 2. The prosecution story in brief, is that the Police of Police Station – RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 Lohandiguda, District – Bastar (C.G.) has received a secret information through the informant and on the basis of the said information, the Police authority has seized a total of 51.520 Kgs of Ganja from the possession of the co-accused person. Thereafter, the co-accused was arrested and the names of the applicants have come into light from the memorandum statement of the co-accused person. Hence, this application. 3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed in this case, and no such seizure has been made from the possession of the applicant, and the applicants are not named in the FIR but merely on the basis of memorandum statement of co-accused, the applicants have been roped in the instant case. It is further submitted that though the applicant No.1 is said to have one criminal antecedent under the NDPS Act from the state of U.P. but so far as the applicant No.2 is concerned, he has no criminal antecedents and the applicant No.2 is only 19 years of age, and further he submits that the applicants were also not present at the place where the contraband article was found. The applicants are in jail since 02.01.2026. The conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, therefore, she prays for grant of bail. 4. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submits that a total of 51.520 Kgs of Ganja has been seized, which is much above the commercial quantity. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed in this case and the names of the applicants have come into light from the memorandum 3 statement of the co-accused person, which goes to show that it appears to be an organized crime. It is further submitted that there is one criminal antecedents of the applicant No.1 under the NDPS Act. Hence, his bail application is liable to be dismissed. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. Taking into consideration the fact that though nothing is said to be seized from the possession of the applicants, and the applicants are not named in the FIR and there is no criminal antecedents of the applicant No.2, but also considering the fact that the quantity of contraband article seized from the possession of the co-accused i.e. 51.520 Kgs of Ganja, is much above the commercial quantity and the charge-sheet has been filed in this case and the names of the applicants have come into light from the memorandum statement of the co-accused person, which goes to show that it appears to be an organized crime and the applicants are also involved in sale and purchase of the contraband article, and there is one criminal antecedent of the applicant No.1 under the NDPS Act, he is a habitual offender and he has misused the bail granted to him earlier, 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. Moreover, the ground regarding to the age of the applicant No.2 is concerned, the same cannot be considered for enlarging him on bail as looking to the seriousness of allegations made 4 against the applicants and the quantity of contraband article seized from the co-accused, thus, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to enlarge the applicants on regular bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of applicants – Mohd. Nafees and Aaqeeb Ahmed involved in Crime No.44/2025, registered at Police Station- Lohandiguda, District – Bastar (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Sections 20(B) of the NDPS Act, is rejected at this stage. 8. Needless to say that the learned trial Court is at liberty to proceed with the trial and conclude the same, expeditiously. 9. The Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rajshekhar