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

2026 Supreme(Raj) 208

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR
ASHOK KUMAR JAIN, J.
Biram S/o Shri Bapulal – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 3280 of 2026
Decided On : 05-05-2026

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Narsi Prasad Sharma
For the Respondent: Vijay Singh Yadav

Discretionary relief is generally denied when an accused is absconding and failing to cooperate with the investigation, particularly in cases involving serious offences where the petitioner's involvement is indicated by investigative materials.

Headnote:(A) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita - Section 482 - Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act - Sections 8/15, 8/25 and 8/29 - Anticipatory relief - Recovery of contraband - Petitioner named in interrogation note of co-accused - Petitioner absconding - Non-cooperation in investigation - Held, in view of the gravity of the offence and the fact that the petitioner is absconding and not cooperating with the investigation, the application for relief is not maintainable. (Paras 3, 7, 8)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner sought relief in connection with an investigation involving the recovery of contraband from a vehicle. While other co-accused were granted relief, the petitioner was implicated based on the interrogation notes of those arrested. The police report indicated that the petitioner was absconding and evading the investigation.

Findings of Court:
The court observed that the allegations were serious and that the petitioner was not cooperating with the investigative process. Given the status of the petitioner as an absconder, the court found no grounds to exercise its discretion to grant the requested relief.

Issues: Whether the petitioner is entitled to relief despite being named in the interrogation of co-accused and currently absconding from the investigation.

Ratio Decidendi: Discretionary relief should not be granted when the accused is absconding and failing to cooperate with the ongoing investigation, particularly in cases involving serious offences.

Result: Application dismissed.

Table of Content
1. establishing precedence through parity with co-accused bail status. (Para 1 , 2 , 6)
2. arguments regarding custodial interrogation necessity in ndps cases. (Para 3 , 4 , 5)
3. non-cooperation and absconding justify denying anticipatory bail. (Para 7 , 8 , 9)

ORDER :

1. The instant bail application is preferred by the petitioner-accused Biram S/o Shri Bapulal, under Section 482 of BNSS for anticipatory bail in a matter arising out of FIR No.130/2025 dated 17.07.2025 registered at Police Station Harnavda Shahji, District Baran for the offence under Sections 8/15 and 8/25 of NDPS Act.

2. Learned Special Judge, NDPS Act Cases, Chhabra, District Baran, has dismissed the anticipatory bail application of the present petitioner on 12th February 2026.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submit that as per facts of the case, on inspection of a car, 21 kg of poppy straw was recovered from possession of Jitu and Kalu Lal and both were released on bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Hon'ble Court on 27.08.2025. He further submits that only on interrogation note of Jitu and Kalu Lal, the petitioner was arrayed as an accused as supplier of contraband articles. He further submits that even Mohan Lal was named for the offence under Section 8/29 of NDPS Act and he was granted bail on 08.08.2025 by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Hon'ble Court. He further submits that in the entire case, there is no need of custodial interrogation as there is no evidence to connect the petitioner with the alleged crime.

4. Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that the allegations are grave and serious in nature.

5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material placed on record.

6. On basis of recovery of poppy-straw in the night of 16-17 July, 2025 from a car, SHO Police Station Harnavda Shahji, District Baran has registered an FIR No. 130/2025 under Sections 8/15 and 8/25 of the NDPS Act. Both the arrested accused Jitu and Kalu Lal were released on bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 27.08.2025. Another person Mohan Lal was named as an accused under section 8/29 of NDPS Act for selling poppy-straw to Jitu and Kalu Lal and he was also released on bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 08.08.2025.

7. The police report suggests that the present petitioner is involved in dealing of contraband article poppy-straw, found in possession of Jitu and Kalu Lal. The police report also indicate that the present petitioner is absconding and currently, he is not within the reach of police.

8. Having considered the entire material and placed on record and also the report of the police, I am of the considered view that the petitioner is not co-operating in the investigation and in such a situation, this is not a fit case to enlarge the present petitioner on anticipatory bail by allowing an application under section 482 of BNSS.

9. As a result, the anticipatory bail application preferred by the petitioner-Biram under section 482 BNSS is hereby dismissed.

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