IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR
ASHOK KUMAR JAIN, J.
Shyoji S/o Sugan Puri – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 6853 of 2026
Decided On : 04-05-2026
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual context of illegal poppy cultivation arrest. (Para 1 , 6) |
| 2. parties' contentions regarding bail eligibility and merits. (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 3. legal reasoning and non-applicability of section 37. (Para 5 , 7 , 8) |
| 4. grant of bail subject to specified conditions. (Para 9 , 10) |
ORDER :
1. The present bail application under Section 483 of BNSS is filed by the applicant-accused Shyoji S/o Sugan Puri seeking bail in respect of a criminal case registered as FIR No.41/2026 dated 07.02.2026 registered at P.S. Bhinai, District - Ajmer, for the offence under Sections 8/18 of NDPS Act.
2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the matter and the investigation against him is complete and he is 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 applicant undertakes not to repeat offence and cooperate with trial, which will take time.
3. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the petitioner was arrested on the charge of illegal cultivation of poppy though there is no evidence that the poppy plaints were cultivated by the petitioner. He also referred orders dated 01.04.2021 passed in S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 4007/2021; Bhagirath Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan and dated 23.05.2024 in Second Bail Application No. 6376/2024; Guman Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan , decided by a Co-ordinate bench at Principal Seat Jodhpur and submitted that illegal cultivation of poppy would fall under Section 18(c) of the NDPS Act and the maximum punishment is up to 10 years.
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 petitioner-accused and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material placed on record by both the parties.
6. On 06.02.2026, SHO, Police Station Bhinai, District Ajmer, has received information about illegal cultivation of poppy by the present petitioner and on information, he has reached the field of the present petitioner and found that poppy plaints were cultivated without any permission. The present petitioner was detained and an FIR No.41/2026 dated 07.02.2026 was registered at PS Bhinai, District Ajmer under Section 8/18 of the NDPS Act.
7. The issue pertains to illegal cultivation of poppy plaints which is a punishable offence underSection 18(c) of the NDPS Act. In case of Bhagirath Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan (supra) and Guman Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan and others (supra), a Co-ordinate Bench after considering the legal position has granted bail to a person who was charged for the offence of cultivation of poppy plant, observing that Section 37 of the NDPS Act is not attracted in such cases.
8. Upon hearing the arguments and perusing the record, we have found that the applicant-accused is no more required in the investigation and he is 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 applicant-accused.
9. Thus, the instant bail application filed on behalf of applicant-accused Shyoji S/o Sugan Puri, is hereby allowed and the applicant-accused is ordered to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court with the following conditions:-
(i) The applicant-accused shall not tamper with evidence or influence the witness in any manner.
(ii) The applicant-accused shall not indulge in any criminal activity and shall not repeat any criminal offence punishable under the Law.
(iii) The applicant-accused shall attend the hearing of the Trial Court on the date fixed by the Trial court or as and when asked to appear befo
In cases involving the illegal cultivation of poppy plants under narcotics legislation, the restrictive bail provisions are not attracted. Courts may grant bail upon considering factors such as the c....
The stringent bail conditions under Section 37 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, are not applicable to cases involving the illicit cultivation of poppy plants, as the legis....
In cases involving the cultivation of poppy plants, the stringent bail conditions under the relevant narcotics statute are not attracted. Where the investigation is complete and the accused is no lon....
The court held that the stringent bail provisions under the relevant narcotics legislation are not attracted in cases involving the cultivation of prohibited plants. Consequently, where the investiga....
The court ruled that the absence of specified commercial quantity for poppy cultivation under the NDPS Act, combined with lack of evidence tampering risk, justifies granting bail.
The court determined that the restrictions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act do not apply when the offence does not involve commercial quantity or severe sections, allowing bail.
The court granted bail under the NDPS Act, finding no commercial quantity prescribed for cultivation and no risk of tampering with evidence.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that while the gravity of the offence and the severity of punishment are relevant considerations for bail, other factors such as the presumption of....
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.