Case Law
Subject : Criminal Law - Bail Matters
JODHPUR, RAJASTHAN – The High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jodhpur has granted bail to two police constables, Hanuman Ram and Suresh Kumar, who were arrested in connection with allegedly manipulating an investigation under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act. The decision, delivered by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mukesh Rajpurohit, hinged on the principle of parity, as the main co-accused, the then Station House Officer (SHO) Smt. Seema Jakhar, had already been granted bail.
The case originates from F.I.R. No. 143/2021 registered at Police Station Barlot, District Sirohi. The petitioners, Hanuman Ram and Suresh Kumar, were serving as constables at the station. According to the prosecution's allegations, a police team had recovered a large quantity of contraband (poppy straw) from an abandoned vehicle.
However, the petitioners, allegedly in connivance with their superior, SHO Smt. Seema Jakhar, accepted an illegal gratification of Rs. 10 lakhs from other co-accused individuals. In return, they allegedly manipulated the investigation, allowed the drug traffickers to escape, and falsified official records (Rojnamcha) to report that the suspects had fled the scene.
The constables were booked under Sections 27-A (financing illicit traffic) and 59 (failure of officer in duty) of the NDPS Act, along with Section 221 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for intentionally omitting to apprehend an offender.
Counsel for the Petitioners: Mr. Vishal Sharma and Mr. Vijay Raj Bishnoi, representing the constables, argued primarily on the grounds of parity. They highlighted that the primary co-accused, SHO Smt. Seema Jakhar, had already been enlarged on bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of the High Court in July 2022. They also pointed out that another co-accused, Hemaram, was granted bail in February 2022.
The defense counsel further submitted that the charge sheet (challan) has been filed, meaning the investigation is complete. They assured the court that the petitioners, being public servants, posed no flight risk. Given that the petitioners have been in judicial custody since July and September 2024 respectively, and the trial is expected to be lengthy, they prayed for the benefit of bail.
Counsel for the State: Learned Public Prosecutor, Mr. H.S. Jodha, vehemently opposed the bail applications. He informed the court that the State has challenged the bail granted to SHO Seema Jakhar by filing a bail cancellation application (S.B. CRLBC No.75/2024), which is pending consideration before the High Court. The prosecutor argued that while the petitioners were subordinate to the SHO, they were equally responsible for the commission of the serious offence.
After considering the rival submissions, Justice Mukesh Rajpurohit found merit in the petitioners' plea. The court's decision was based on several key factors:
In its order, the court stated:
"Having considered the rival submissions, facts and circumstances of the case, considering the fact that the charge sheet has already been filed, co-accused Smt. Seema Jakhar and Hema Ram have already been enlarged on bail, trial of the case will take sufficiently long time and looking to the custody period of the petitioners, without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail."
Consequently, the bail applications were allowed. Hanuman Ram and Suresh Kumar are to be released on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000/- and two sureties of Rs. 50,000/- each.
The court, however, added a crucial rider, making the bail conditional on the outcome of the SHO's bail cancellation plea. It clarified that if any adverse order is passed in the pending application against Smt. Seema Jakhar, the Public Prosecutor would be at liberty to seek cancellation of the present bail granted to the constables.
#Bail #NDPSAct #RajasthanHighCourt
Bombay HC Grants Interim Protection from Arrest Despite Pending Anticipatory Bail in Lower Court Due to Accused's Marriage: Sections 351(2), 64(2)(m), 74 IPC
01 May 2026
Allahabad HC Dismisses FIR Plea Against Rahul Gandhi
01 May 2026
Arbitrary Road Height Raising Banned Without Approval: Patna HC Enforces SOP, Penalizes Contractors
01 May 2026
Delhi HC Closes ANI's Copyright Suit Against PTI After Amicable Settlement Under Order XXIII Rule 3 CPC
01 May 2026
Post-Conviction NDPS Bail Can't Be Granted Solely on Long Incarceration; Section 37 Twin Conditions Mandatory: J&K&L High Court
01 May 2026
Defying Transfer Order Justifies Removal from Service Despite Family Care Plea: Orissa High Court
01 May 2026
Heavy Machinery Barred in Mining Leases Except Dredging: Uttarakhand HC Directs DM to Enforce Rule 29(17) of Minor Mineral Rules
01 May 2026
Administrative Actions Judged on Materials at Time of Decision, Not Subsequent Developments: Patna High Court
01 May 2026
No Deemed Confirmation After Probation Without Written Order Under Model Standing Orders Clause 4A: Bombay High Court
01 May 2026
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.