1 2026:CGHC:17275 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 792 of 2026 Bhojraj Patel S/o Shankar Patel Aged About 40 Years R/o Village- Loharsingh, Police Station- Jharband, District- Bargarh (Odisha) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station- Saraipali, District- Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Shri Rajeev Kumar Dubey, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Ms. Palak Dwivedi, PL. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 15/04/2026 1. This is the third bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.197/2024 registered at Police Station Saraipali, District Mahasamund (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 20(b) of N.D.P.S. Act. GOURI MUDALIAR Digitally signed by GOURI MUDALIAR Date: 2026.04.20 11:41:30 +0530 2 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 16.07.2024, on the basis of the secret information given by the informant, the police of Police Station Saraipali seized 50.200 kilograms illegal contraband substance Ganja from the possession of the present applicant and co-accused which was being transported in Swift Desire car bearing registration No. CG-12 AP-0252. Thereafter, the police of Police Station Saraipali, District Mahasamund (C.G.) registered FIR bearing Crime No. 197/2024 for the offence punishable under Section 20(B) of NDPS Act against the present applicant and co-accused person. Charge sheet has been filed and the case is pending before the learned Special Judge (N.D.P.S. Act), Saraipali, District Mahasamund (C.G.) as Special Criminal Case No. 59/2024. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that this is the third bail application of the applicant, first bail application of the applicant was rejected on merits on 22/04/2025 vide MCRC No.3043/2025 and second bail application of the applicant was rejected on 28/08/2025 vide MCRC No.6362/2025. He would submit that the prosecution case is false and fabricated and as per the prosecution, the alleged recovery was made at 13:00 hours on 16.07.2024, whereas the applicant had already been apprehended and kept in the police station since 01:00 AM on the same day. Thus, it is impossible for the applicant to have committed the alleged offence, which creates a serious doubt in the prosecution story. It is further submitted that despite specific 3 requests, the prosecution initially withheld the CCTV footage of the police station, which is the best evidence. Only after court intervention, the footage was produced, which supports the defence version and shows the presence of the applicant in the police station prior to the alleged incident. Thus, the prosecution story is false and unexplained. He would submit that there are total 13 prosecution witnesses in the present case, out of which only 2 witness have been examined before the trial court. He would further submit that charge-sheet has already been filed in the present case, the applicant is in jail since 16/07/2024 and the conclusion of trial is likely to take some time, therefore, he prays for releasing the applicant on regular bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record. 6. From perusal of the record, it transpires that this is the third bail application filed by the applicant. The first bail application was rejected on merits on 22/04/2025 vide MCRC No. 3043/2025 and the second bail application was rejected on 28/08/2025 vide MCRC No. 6362/2025. Considering the nature and gravity of the offence, particularly the recovery of commercial quantity of contraband (50.200 kg Ganja), further the objections raised by the applicant regarding alleged false implication and CCTV footage 4 involve disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated at this stage and are matters to be decided during trial, so far as the ground regarding examination of only 2 out of 13 prosecution witnesses is concerned, the same by itself is not sufficient to constitute a change in circumstance so as to entertain this third bail application. 7. Accordingly, the third bail application of the applicant- Bhojraj Patel, involved in Crime No.197/2024 registered at Police Station Saraipali, District Mahasamund (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 20(b) of N.D.P.S. Act, is rejected. 8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information. to the trial Court concerned for necessary information e tr Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE gouri