1 2026:CGHC:16963 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1803 of 2026 1. Banwari Lal Gupta S/o Bachchu Prasad Aged About 35 Years R/o Village - Pipraha, Police Station Rajendra Gram, District- Anuppur (M.P.) 2. Rohit Gupta S/o Kunj Bihari Aged About 25 Years R/o Village - Pipraha, Police Station Rajendra Gram, District- Anuppur (M.P.) 3. Ankul Jaitwar S/o Late Babulal, Aged About 24 Years R/o Village - Ledhra, Police Station Rajendra Gram, District- Anuppur (M.P.) 4. Gopal Panadiya @ Gopi Panika S/o Late Gendlal Panadiya Aged About 28 Years R/o Village - Basniha , Police Station Rajendra Gram, District- Anuppur (M.P.) ... Applicants versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station - Gourela, District- Gourela - Pendra - Marwahi (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicants : Mr. Rajeev Kumar Dubey, Advocate. For Non-applicants/State : Ms. Ankita Shukla, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 13.04.2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 304/2024 registered at Police Station Gourela, District - Gourela-Pendra-Marwahi (C.G.), for the offence ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2026.04.15 18:15:37 +0530 2 punishable under Sections 20(b) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and Section 111 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 15.09.2024, the police of Police Station Gourela received secret information that certain persons were transporting illicit contraband in a vehicle. Acting upon the said information, the police conducted a search of vehicles. During the search, Banwari Lal Gupta, Rohit Gupta, and Ankul Jaitwar were found transporting a psychotropic substance, namely Ganja, in a total quantity of 106.16 kilograms, valued at Rs. 21,20,000/-, in a Brezza car bearing registration No. MP-65-ZB-6852. Thereafter, the police of Police Station Gourela, District Gourela-Pendra- Marwahi (C.G.), registered an FIR bearing Crime No. 304/2024 for offences punishable under Sections 20(b) and 29 of the NDPS Act, and Section 111 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and arrested the accused persons. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the present applicants have been falsely implicated in the case, and the contraband article, i.e., 106.16 kg of ganja, was not seized from their conscious possession. He further submits that the prosecution agency has failed to comply with the provisions of Section 42 of the NDPS Act. He also submits that the co-accused persons, namely Ajit Rana and Siddheshwar Rana, have already been granted bail by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP (Crl.) No. 18875/2025, vide order dated 23.01.2026. Furthermore, the applicants have been in custody since 15.09.2024. Therefore, it is prayed that the present applicants are entitled to be granted regular bail on the ground of parity. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State/non-applicant opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed in the present case before the competent Court. She further submits that although applicants No. 2 to 4 have no criminal antecedents, applicant No. 3 1 has six criminal antecedents, out of which three cases are under the NDPS Act pertaining to the years 2013, 2014, and 2019. She further submits that the applicant No. 1 has already been convicted in one of the said cases, which pertains to the year 2014, which clearly indicates that he is a habitual offender. Therefore, it is contended that the applicants are not entitled to the grant of regular bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly, that the applicant No. 1 has six criminal antecedents, out of which three cases are under the NDPS Act pertaining to the years 2013, 2014, and 2019. She further submits that the applicant No. 1 has already been convicted in one of the said cases, which pertains to the year 2014, which clearly indicates that he is a habitual offender, further 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, this Court is of the opinion that is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant No. 1 – Banwari Lal Gupta, involved in Crime No. 304/2024 registered at Police Station Gourela, District - Gourela-Pendra-Marwahi (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 20(b) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and Section 111 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, is rejected. 7. Whereas applicant Nos. 2 to 4 have no criminal antecedents, and the other co-accused persons, namely Ajit Rana and Siddheshwar Rana, have already been granted bail by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP (Crl.) No. 4 18875/2025, vide order dated 23.01.2026, and further, the charge-sheet has already been submitted before the competent Court, and the applicants have been in custody since 15.09.2024, and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some more time, this Court is of the view that applicant Nos. 2 to 4 are entitled to be released on bail in the present case. 8. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant No. 2 to 4 - Rohit Gupta, Ankul Jaitwar and Gopal Panadiya @ Gopi Panika involved in Crime No. 304/2024 registered at Police Station Gourela, District - Gourela- Pendra-Marwahi (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 20(b) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and Section 111 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond with two local sureties each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such 5 proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicants shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicants are deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against them in accordance with law. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Abhishek