Bail may be denied in cases involving commercial quantities of narcotics when the applicant is identified as a supplier by a co-accused and is found to be a habitual offender with a history of misusing previous bail liberties.

Order on Board

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. 149/2025 registered at Police Station Excise Department Divisional Flying Squad Division Surguja (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 21(C) & 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 20.11.2025, the Assistant District Excise Officer, Ranjeet Kumar Gupta, while on patrol duty at Ramanujganj, received confidential information that two persons were engaged in supplying cough syrup in the Paltan Ghat area. Acting upon the said information, he informed the District Excise Officer over mobile phone and, without obtaining a search warrant, proceeded to the spot along with witnesses and staff. At Paltan Ghat, a suspicious Activa bearing registration No. CG-30-G-7112 was intercepted. Upon inquiry, the rider disclosed his name as Rahul Gupta. A search of the vehicle, conducted in the presence of witnesses and videography, led to the recovery of 80 bottles of Onerex cough syrup from a sack kept on the Activa. During memorandum statement, accused Rahul Gupta disclosed that he had purchased the said contraband cough syrup from the present applicant, Praveen Kashyap. On the basis of the said disclosure, co-accused Praveen Kashyap was arrested for the offence punishable under Section 21(C) of the NDPS Act. Hence, the bail application.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case and he is in jail since 20.11.2025. He further submits that only on the basis of memorandum statement of co-accused, Rahul Gupta, present applicant has been made an accused in the alleged offence, without any seizure of contraband article from him. He also submits that the mandatory provisions with regard to search and seizure were not complied with in this case. So far as the criminal antecedent of the applicant is concerned, applicant has one criminal antecedent, which is of the year 2025 under the NDPS Act, against which, the applicant had preferred bail application bearing MCRC No.3604 of 2026, which was rejected by this Court vide order dated 21.04.2026 passed in MCRC No.3604 of 2026. He later submits that 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. He further submits that the quantity of contraband article i.e. 80 bottles of Onerex cough syrup recovered from a sack kept in the Activa, on which co-accused, Rahul Gupta is traveling carrying the same, the said quantity of contraband article is much above the commercial quantity as notified under the NDPS Act, further during memorandum statement, the said co-accused disclosed that he had purchased the said contraband cough syrup from the present applicant, Praveen Kashyap. He also submits that bail application of co-accused, namely, Rahul Gupta has already been rejected by this Court vide order dated 149 of 2025 in MCRC No.3623 of 2026 and the applicant has one criminal antecedent of the year 2025 under the NDPS Act. Therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail.

5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the cas