In cases involving commercial quantities of psychotropic substances, financial assistance provided via UPI transfers to co-accused can be interpreted as active participation in an organized crime network, thereby attracting the statutory bar against bail under Section 37 of the NDPS Act.

Order on Board

1. This is the second bail application filed under Section 483 of the BNSS for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 112/2025 registered at Police Station - Ambikapur District Surguja, (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 21(C), 22(C) and 29 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

2. The earlier bail application of the applicant being MCRC No. 6893 of 2025 was rejected by this Court vide order dated 01.09.2025 on merits.

3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the co-accused persons were intercepted by the police on suspicion, and during search and seizure, 108 bottles of WNGS RX syrup of 100 ml each containing Codeine Phosphate and 100 pieces of Buprenorphine injection of 2 ml each containing psychotropic substances were recovered from their possession. It is further alleged that during the course of investigation, it was revealed that the present applicant had transferred a sum of Rs. 25,000/- into the account of a co-accused person through his mobile phone using UPI, and on that basis, the allegation of financing of the offence has been levelled against the present applicant.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that this is the second bail application of the applicant and the earlier bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Hon’ble Court. He further submits that the present applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present offence. It is submitted that no contraband substance, much less any psychotropic substance, has been recovered from the possession of the applicant and his implication is purely based on conjectures and surmises. He further submits that co-accused Anil Gupta @ Babu Gupta, whose chicken shop is situated adjacent to the shop of the applicant, had approached the applicant on 17.02.2025 stating that his UPI was not functioning, and on his request the applicant transferred an amount of Rs. 25,000/- to his account, and thereafter, on the asking of the said co-accused, the amount was further sent to another mobile number, without any knowledge or involvement of the applicant in any illegal activity. It is further submitted that apart from the said transaction, there is no connecting link or independent evidence to establish any nexus of the applicant with the alleged offence under Section 29 of the NDPS Act or any alleged financing of illicit activity. He further submits that out of 13 prosecution witnesses, only 06 prosecution witnesses have been examined till date before the learned Trial Court and the trial is likely to take considerable time for its conclusion, whereas the applicant has already undergone incarceration for about one year. It is also submitted that the allegation of aiding or financing the offence is not supported by any material evidence except the alleged UPI transaction, which by itself does not establish any criminal intent. Therefore, the applicant deserves to be released on bail. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has already been filed, he has no any previous criminal antecedents, is in jail since 21.05.2025 and there is no likelihood of tampering with the evidence, therefore the applicant deserves to be enlarged on second bail.

5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the present case relates to recovery of commercial quantity of contraband, wherein 108 bottles of WNGS RX syrup of 10