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) 209

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR
ASHOK KUMAR JAIN, J.
Kaushal S/o Bheem Singh Sansi – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application Nos. 5802, 6334 of 2026
Decided On : 05-05-2026

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants : Umesh Dixit, Narsi Prasad Sharma
For the Respondent: Vijay Singh Yadav

Bail may be granted when the investigation is complete, the accused has been in custody for a significant period, and the trial is likely to be delayed, provided that the court does not express a final opinion on the merits of the case.

Headnote:(A) Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Sections 8, 20, 25, 29 - Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Section 483 - Bail - Grant of - Investigation complete - Accused in custody for significant period - Trial likely to take time - Recovery of substance and nature of material to be determined at trial - Bail granted subject to conditions. (Paras 7, 8, 9)

(B) Bail - Discretionary power - Court to consider totality of facts and circumstances - Without expressing opinion on merits - Conditions imposed to ensure presence and prevent tampering. (Paras 9, 10)

Facts of the case:
Two individuals were apprehended in connection with the recovery of a narcotic substance from a vehicle. One individual was arrested based on the disclosure statement of the other. Arguments were raised regarding the non-compliance of mandatory search procedures, the nature of the recovered substance, and the lack of criminal antecedents.

Findings of Court:
The investigation was concluded, and the accused had been in custody for a sufficient duration. The court determined that the trial would be protracted and that the issues regarding the nature of the recovered material were matters for trial.

Issues: Whether the accused should be released on bail considering the stage of investigation, the nature of the recovered substance, and the potential for trial delay.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the investigation is complete and the trial is expected to be delayed, the court may exercise its discretion to grant bail, provided that the accused adheres to strict conditions, without prejudice to the merits of the case.

Result: Bail applications allowed.

Table of Content
1. establishing the factual matrix and custodial status of the accused. (Para 1 , 7)
2. parties' contentions regarding false implication and evidentiary admissibility. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5)
3. judicial criteria for granting bail pending trial. (Para 6 , 8 , 9)
4. standard bail order with necessary conditional safeguards. (Para 10 , 11)

ORDER :

1. These bail applications under Section 483 of BNSS are filed by the applicants-accused Kaushal S/o Bheem Singh Sansi and Sonu S/o Bannalal @ Banna Sansi, seeking bail in respect of a criminal case registered as FIR No.81/2026 dated 20.03.2026 registered at P.S. Sadar Tonk, District - Tonk, for the offence under Sections 8/20, 8/25 of NDPS Act.

2. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the matter and the investigation against them is complete and they are no more required in investigation. He further submits that there are no chance of fleeing of applicant accused from the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court. He also submits that the applicants undertakes not to repeat offence and cooperate with trial, which will take time.

3. Learned counsel on behalf of the petitioner accused Kaushal submits that no recovery is effected from the present petitioner. He further submits that the recovery is effected from accused Sonu and only on his interrogation note, the present petitioner Kaushal was arrayed as an accused. He further submits that the pending cases are relating to Excise Act and they were registered five years before the registration of current case.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner accused Sonu submits that police has not complied with mandatory provisions under the NDPS Act before effecting search and seizure. He also submits that the petitioner was not aware about the bag loaded on scooty. He also submits that the recovered article of green leaves and stems does not fall within definition of ganja. He also submits that the recovered quantity is less than commercial and there is no criminal antecedents against the petitioner accused.

5. Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail applications and submitted that the allegations are grave and serious in nature. He has also filed a report received from concerned Police Station.

6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material placed on record by both the parties.

7. After midnight on 20.03.2026, a person was found running on scooty number RJ-26-ES-2147 who was nabbed on follow-up. The police has recovered 10.681 kg of ganja from a gunny bag loaded on scooty. The accused Sonu was detained and an FIR No. 81/2026 was registered at PS Sadar, District Tonk. Arrested Sonu has named Kaushal as the source of supply of ganja to him and Kaushal was arrested on 22.03.2026 for the offence under Section 8/29 of NDPS Act. There is no criminal antecedents against petitioner accused Sonu, but five criminal cases relating to Rajasthan Excise Act were registered against petitioner accused Kaushal, the last case was registered on 30.10.2021. The recovered quantity of Ganja is less than commercial.

8. The issue regarding recovery of green leaves and stems is required to be considered at the time of trial and not a subject matter at this stage. The ganja is defined under Section 2(iii)(b) of the NDPS Act. We are not expressing any opinion on basis of material placed before us.

9. Upon hearing the arguments and perusing the record, we have found that the applicants-accused are no more required in the investigation and they are in custody for quite some time. The further proceedings will take its own time, therefore, looking to entirety of facts and circumstances of the case and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, the Court deems it appropriate to grant bail to the applicants-accused.

10. Thus, these bail applications filed on behalf of applicants-accused Kaushal S/o Bheem Singh Sansi and Sonu S/o Bannalal @ B

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