SAMEER KHAN vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

1

CGHC010397522026 2026:CGHC:45796
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 9637 of 2026
1 - Sameer Khan S/o Athar Khan Aged About 20 Years R/o Ward No. 05
Patharia, Dist. Mungeli, C.G.
... Applicant
versus
1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Patharia, Dist. Mungeli
C.G.
... Non-applicant
For Applicant : Mr. Ashutosh Trivedi, Advocate
For Non-applicant
: Mr. Akash Agrawal, P.L.
/State
Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey
Order on Board
29/10/2026
1. The applicant has preferred this first bail application under
Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for
grant of regular bail as he has been arrested in connection with

2
Crime No. 204/2026 registered at Police Station Patharia, District
Mungeli (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 20(b) of
the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985
(hereinafter, “NDPS Act”).
2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 01/08/2026, five
persons were transporting contraband i.e. ganja in three
motorcycles. The police, upon receiving secret information,
intercepted those vehicles at around 04:30 PM and seized 3.970
kgs of ganja from co-accused Ajay Shrivastava, 4.030 kgs of
ganja from co-accused Diesel and 2.05 kgs of ganja from the
present applicant which totals to 10.05 kgs of ganja. Thereafter,
the accused persons were taken into custody and the aforesaid
offence was registered against the present applicant.
3. Mr. Ashutosh Trivedi, learned counsel appearing for the applicant,
would submit that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been
implicated in the present case. He would further submit that the
total seized contraband article, i.e., 10.05 kgs of Ganja, is of
intermediate quantity (less than commercial quantity), hence the
rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act would not apply to the
applicant's case. He would also contend that the investigation has
been completed, charge-sheet has already been filed, there is no
criminal antecedent of the applicant and the applicant has been in
judicial custody since 01/10/2026, and since the conclusion of the

3
trial is likely to take considerable time, the applicant may be
enlarged on regular bail.
4. On the other hand, Mr. Akash Agrawal, learned counsel appearing
for the non-applicant/State, would oppose the bail application and
submit that the present applicant was involved in illegal
transportation of prohibited drug, therefore, this bail application is
liable to be rejected.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case
diary.
6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case,
particularly that the total seized contraband article (10.05 kgs of
Ganja) is of intermediate quantity, which is below commercial
quantity; further considering that charge-sheet has already been
filed, the applicant has no criminal antecedent and he is in judicial
custody since 01/10/2026, and the conclusion of the trial is likely
to take some time, this Court is inclined to enlarge the applicant
on regular bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .
7. It is directed that in the event of the applicant executing a personal
bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety in the like sum to
the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court, he shall be released
on bail, on following conditions :-
(i) he shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement,
threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts
of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such

4
fact to the Court,
(ii) he shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial
to fair and expeditious trial, and
(iii) he shall appear before the trial Court on each and
every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of
the trial.
8. The observation made hereinabove is for the purpose of deciding
this bail application only, the trial Court shall decide the case on its
own merits.
Sd/-
(Rakesh Mohan Pandey)
JUDGE
Harneet