1 2026:CGHC:18153 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3608 of 2026 Mohammed Kaish S/o Mohammed Akram Khan Aged About 27 Years R/o Sanjay Nagar, Near Sohel Kirana Store, P S Tikrapara, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh (As Per Correct Details) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station - Utai, District Durg Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Aishwary Diwan, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 21/04/2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 11/2026 registered at Police Station Utai, District Durg (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN 2 22(b), 8(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that during the course of investigation, prohibited narcotic substances in the form of intoxicant tablets were recovered from the accused persons. From accused Triloki Yadav, narcotic tablets weighing 30.72 grams were seized, and from co-accused Cheman Vishwakarma and Hakim Khan, a combined quantity of 232.96 grams of such tablets was recovered. Thus, a total of 263.68 grams of prohibited narcotic tablets was seized, which falls within the category of commercial quantity. Although no contraband was directly recovered from the present applicant/accused, Mohammad Kaish, the prosecution alleges that co-accused Cheman Vishwakarma and Hakim Khan, in their statements, disclosed that they had purchased the said narcotic tablets from the applicant. On the basis of such material available in the case diary, the involvement of the applicant in the alleged offence is prima facie established. The prosecution further contends that there is sufficient evidence indicating the role of the applicant in the supply of the prohibited substances, and therefore, after completion of investigation, the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court against all the accused persons. Hence, the bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case. He further 3 submits that no seizure of any contraband article has been made from the possession of present applicant, only on the basis of memorandum statement of co-accused persons, present applicant has been made accused in the present case. The applicant is in jail since 10.01.2026 and the conclusion of the trial may take quite long time. Accordingly, he prays for enlarging the applicant on regular bail. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the State/non-applicant opposes the bail application and submit that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court. She further submits that the quantity of contraband article i.e. 263.68 grams of prohibited narcotic tablets was seized from the possession of co-accused persons, which is much above the commercial quantity as notified under the NDPS Act and during the course of investigation, the said co-accused persons in their memorandum statements, disclosed that they had purchased the said narcotic tablets from the present applicant, therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. From perusal of the records, it prima facie appears that the contraband article i.e. 263.68 grams of prohibited narcotic tablets was seized from the possession of co-accused persons, which is much above the commercial quantity as notified under the NDPS 4 Act and during the course of investigation, the said co-accused persons in their memorandum statements, disclosed that they had purchased the said narcotic tablets from the present applicant, which indicates prima facie involvement of the applicant along with co-accused in an organized illicit trafficking of narcotic substances. As such, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant - Mohammed Kaish, involved in Crime No. 11/2026 registered at Police Station Utai, District Durg (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 22(b), 8(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, is rejected. 8. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Akhil