SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(RAJ) 459

HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR, J
DHEERAJ SINGH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
CRLMB / 357 / 2025



Advocates:
Mr. Vijay Kumar Gaur, Mr. Shrawan Singh Rathore, PP

The court granted bail based on the determination that the quantity of contraband supplied was below commercial threshold and the petitioner had no prior criminal antecedents.

Headnote:(A) Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Sections 8, 15, 25 and 29 - Bail application under Section 483 BNSS - Petitioner arrested for possessing 137 kgs. of contraband (poppy husk/straw) - Only 40 kgs. supplied by petitioner, which is below commercial quantity - No criminal antecedents - Court finds prima facie that contraband supplied is below commercial quantity. (Paras 1-6)

(B) Bail - Consideration for bail - No contraband recovered from conscious possession of petitioner - Implication based solely on co-accused statements - Petitioner entitled to bail based on circumstances. (Paras 6-7)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner was arrested for involvement in F.I.R. No.25/2023, with contraband recovered from a vehicle. The prosecution claims 137 kgs. were involved, but only 40 kgs. were supplied by the petitioner.

Findings of Court:
The court finds that the petitioner’s involvement is limited to a quantity below the commercial threshold and has no prior criminal record.

Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioner should be granted bail given the quantity of contraband and lack of prior offenses.

Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that the quantity of contraband involved was below commercial quantity, and the petitioner had no criminal history, meriting bail.

Result: Bail application allowed.

Order :

1. This application for bail under Section 483 BNSS has been filed by the petitioner who has been arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.25/2023 registered at Police Station Arnod, Dist. Pratapgarh, for the offences under Sections 8/15, 25 and 29 of NDPS Act.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that as per the prosecution, contraband (poppy husk/straw) weighing 137 kgs. in 6 plastic sacks was recovered from a mini truck- tempo bearing registration No.MP-43-L-2714. Drawing attention of the Court towards the challan papers and the disclosure statements of the co-accused Zahid Khan who was allegedly transporting the recovered contraband in the offending vehicle, learned counsel submitted that only 40 kgs of the total 137 kgs. of contraband (poppy husk/straw) so recovered was supplied by the petitioners to the co-accused persons. The remaining 97 kgs. of the contraband was procured by the co-accused persons from co-accused- Badshah.

4. Learned counsel submitted that the contraband in the present case has not been recovered from the conscious possession of the present petitioner. The contraband allegedly supplied by the petitioner to the co-accused persons is below commercial quantity. The petitioner does not have any criminal antecedents and he has been implicated in the present case solely on the basis of the disclosure statements of the co-accused persons. On these grounds, learned counsel implored the Court to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

5. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application. However, learned Public Prosecutor was not in a position to refute the fact that at the contraband weighing 40 kgs. was supplied by the present petitioner to the co- accused persons which is below commercial quantity. He was also not in a position to refute the fact that the petitioner does not have any criminal antecedents.

6. Having considered the rival submissions, facts and circumstances of the case, this Court prima facie finds that the contraband allegedly supplied by the petitioner to the co-accused persons is below commercial quantity. Thus, without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

7. Consequently, the bail application under Section 483 BNSS is allowed. It is ordered that the accused-petitioner Dheeraj Singh S/o Shri Bhagwan Singh arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.25/2023 registered at Police Station Arnod, Dist. Pratapgarh, shall be released on bail, if not wanted in any other case, provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- and two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each, to the satisfaction of learned trial court, for his appearance before that court on each & every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till completion of the trial.

8. It is however, made clear that findings recorded/observations made above are for limited purposes of adjudication of bail application. The trial court shall not get prejudiced by the same.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top