NEHAL SINGH vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

Court
Chhattisgarh High Court

1


2026:CGHC:26299
NAFR
KUNAL
DEWANGAN
Digitally
signed by
KUNAL
DEWANGAN
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 5543 of 2026
Nehal Singh S/o Raghubir Singh Aged About 30 Years (Correct Name
Mentioned), R/o Indrapara, Zone-1, B.M.Y. Charoda, Police Station G R P
Charoda, District Durg Chhattisgarh
... Applicant(s)
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station
Amanaka Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh
.. Respondent(s)
For Applicant : Ms. Fouzia Mirza, Senior Advocate along with
Mr. Ali Afzaal Mirza, Advocate.
For Respondent/State : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer.
Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Order on Board
29.06.2026
1. This is the second 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.
340/2025 registered at Police Station – Amanaka, District Raipur
(C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 21(C) and 29 of the
N.D.P.S Act, 1985.
2. The first bail application of the applicant was rejected on merits by this

2
Court vide order dated 08.12.2025 passed in MCRC No. 10006/2025.
3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 15.10.2025, Police
Station Amanaka received secret information that near Gate No. 4 of
AIIMS Hospital, beside G.E. Road, Tatibandh, two persons were
carrying narcotic syrup and were searching for customers. Acting
upon the said information and following the procedure prescribed
under the NDPS Act, the police conducted a raid at the spot, wherein
two persons, namely, Yuvraj Singh Chouhan and Wajid Khan, were
lawfully apprehended. A grey-coloured bag kept inside the E-rickshaw
bearing Registration No. CG 04 QN 1623 was searched and 40
bottles of Glankof-T syrup containing Codeine Phosphate and
Triprolidine Hydrochloride, each bottle containing approximately 100
ml, i.e., a total quantity of 4000 ml (4 litres), were seized from their
possession. The memorandum statements of the co-accused persons,
namely, Wajid Khan and Yuvraj Singh Chouhan, were recorded,
wherein they stated that they had purchased the said syrup bottles
from the present applicant. Thereafter, the applicant was interrogated
and his memorandum statement was also recorded, wherein he
disclosed that he had purchased the said narcotic syrup from
Bhavnath Tiwari, a resident of Padumnagar, Charoda, and had sold
the same to the co-accused persons. Finding prima facie evidence
against the present applicant, an offence under Sections 21(c) and 29
of the NDPS Act was registered against him along with the other co-
accused persons vide Crime No. 340/2025 at Police Station
Amanaka, District Raipur, and the matter was taken up for
investigation. After completion of the investigation, the charge-sheet
has been filed before the competent Court.

3
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the first bail application
of the applicant was rejected on merits by this Court vide order dated
08.12.2025 passed in MCRC No. 10006/2025 and the new ground for
filing of the present second bail application is that the applicant is in
custody since 15.10.2025 and despite filing of the charge-sheet and
framing of charges on 08.04.2026, not a single prosecution witness
has been examined till date. It is submitted that after framing of
charges, summons were issued to prosecution witnesses for their
appearance before the trial Court on different occasions, however, the
same were returned unserved and, consequently, the evidence could
not be recorded. In support of the said contention, copies of the order-
sheets of the trial Court have been annexed along with the application.
It is further submitted that as many as 15 prosecution witnesses are
yet to be examined and therefore, there is no likelihood of the trial
being concluded in the near future. It is contended that the applicant
has been implicated in the present case solely on the basis of the
memorandum statements of the co-accused persons and no
contraband has been recovered from his conscious and exclusive
possession. Learned counsel further submits that there is no
independent or incriminating material available on record to show that
the applicant had sold the alleged narcotic syrup to the co-accused
persons and the prosecution has failed to collect material evidence,
including CCTV footage and relevant records from the company
where the applicant was employed. It is also submitted that the
procedure adopted by the police in respect of seizure and weighment
is doubtful. Hence, on account of prolonged incarceration, delay in trial
and change in circumstances, the applicant deserves to be enlarged

4
on bail.
5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application
and submits that the first bail application of the applicant has already
been rejected on merits by this Court vide order dated 08.12.2025
passed in MCRC No. 10006/2025. It is further submitted that no
substantial change in circumstances has taken place thereafter so as
to warrant reconsideration of the applicant's prayer for bail. Learned
State counsel submits that during the course of investigation, 40
bottles of Glankof-T syrup containing Codeine Phosphate and
Triprolidine Hydrochloride, each bottle containing 100 ml, i.e., a total
quantity of 4000 ml (4 litres), which is much above the commercial
quantity, was seized from the possession of co-accused persons
namely, Yuvraj Singh Chouhan and Wajid Khan. It is submitted that in
their memorandum statements, the said co-accused persons
specifically disclosed that they had purchased the seized narcotic
syrup from the present applicant. Thereafter, the memorandum
statement of the present applicant was also recorded, wherein he
disclosed that he had procured the said narcotic syrup from one
Bhavnath Tiwari, resident of Padumnagar, Charoda, and had
subsequently sold the same to the co-accused persons. Thus, the
material available on record prima facie reveals an organized chain of
illicit trafficking in narcotic substances involving the present applicant.
It is further submitted that the grounds raised in the present repeat bail
application are not sufficient to interfere with the earlier order passed
on merits and, therefore, the applicant is not entitled to be enlarged on
bail.
6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case

5
diary.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and
gravity of allegations levelled against the applicant, the fact that the
first bail application of the applicant was rejected on merits by this
Court vide order dated 08.12.2025 passed in MCRC No. 10006/2025
and the new ground raised in the present second bail application is
that the applicant is in custody since 15.10.2025 and despite framing
of charges, no prosecution witness has been examined till date, this
Court has perused the order-sheets of the trial Court annexed with the
application. Although it appears that no prosecution witness has been
examined after framing of charges and the next date fixed before the
trial Court for recording evidence i.e. 03.07.2026, however,
considering the fact that the applicant has been implicated not only on
the basis of the memorandum statements of co-accused persons
namely, Yuvraj Singh Chouhan and Wajid Khan, who specifically
disclosed that they had purchased the seized narcotic syrup from the
present applicant, but also in view of the memorandum statement of
the present applicant himself, wherein he disclosed that he had
procured the contraband from Bhavnath Tiwari and thereafter sold the
same to the co-accused persons, prima facie, the material available
on record indicates the involvement of the applicant in an organized
chain of illicit trafficking of narcotic substances. Further, the quantity of
contraband seized i.e. 40 bottles of Glankof-T syrup containing
Codeine Phosphate and Triprolidine Hydrochloride measuring 4000
ml (4 litres) is much above the commercial quantity. In such
circumstances, this Court is of the considered opinion that the ground
of delay, as canvassed by the applicant, by itself does not constitute a

6
substantial change in circumstances so as to take a view different
from the one already taken by this Court while rejecting the first bail
application on merits. Accordingly, no case for grant of bail is made
out.
8. Accordingly, the second bail application of the applicant- Nehal
Singh, involved in Crime No. 340/2025 registered at Police Station –
Amanaka, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under
Section 21(C) and 29 of the N.D.P.S Act, 1985, is rejected.
9. However, this Court hopes and trust that the trial Court shall make an
earnest endeavour to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible
preferably within a period of four months from the date of passing of
order, if there is no legal impediment.
10. The Director General of Police, Chhattisgarh, is directed to ensure the
presence of the prosecution witnesses, including seizure witness and
prosecution witnesses who are police personnel, for recording their
evidence on the next date fixed i.e. 03.07.2026. Failing which, their
salaries shall be stopped, as the conclusion of the trial is being
delayed due to the laxity of the police personnel.
11. A copy of this order be sent to the Director General of Police,
Chhattisgarh through the learned State counsel for information and
necessary action forthwith.
12. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court
concerned for necessary information and compliance. S
Sd/ Sd/-
(Ramesh Sinha)
CHIEF JUSTICE
Kunal