[2026:RJ-JD:1908]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 14379/2024 Ayan Khan S/o Shri Gulsher Khan Pathan, Aged About 22 Years, R/o Mokhpura, Ps Hathunia, Dist Pratapgarh. (At Present Lodged In Dist Jail Bhilwara)

----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP.

----Respondent Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 13654/2024 Gaurav Gwala S/o Sh. Dharmendra Gwala, Aged About 21 Years, R/o W.no. 22, Pratapgarh, P.s. Kotwali, Pratapgarh Dist.

Pratapgarh. (At Present Lodged In Sub Jail, Gulabpura)

----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP.

----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajak Khan Mr. Pankaj Choudhary Mr. Mangi Lal Bishnoi For Respondent(s) : Mr. Hanuman Prajapati, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR

Order

13/01/2026

1. These applications for bail under Section 483 of BNSS (439 Cr.P.C.) have been filed by the petitioners who have been arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.160/2024 registered at Police Station Aasind, District Bhilwara, for offences under Sections 8/22 and

8/25 of the NDPS Act.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that as per prosecution, on 17.05.2024, the SHO of Police Station Aasind, District Bhilwara during the nakabandi at Maukham Chauraha (NH- 158) flagged down one white coloured Alto Car having registration number as MP-14-CC-1238 and after following the procedure provided under NDPS Act, the police searched the offending vehicle and the occupants of the offending vehicle; they recovered contraband weighing 80 gms, 100 gms and 58.80 gms, respectively from the petitioners and one Ameer Hamja.

3. Learned counsel submitted that though the contraband was recovered separately from three persons but the police only with a view to falsely implicate the petitioners for carrying the contraband (greater than commercial quantity) has jointly weighed the contraband and submitted the charge-sheet against the petitioners and co-accused Ameer Hamja for carrying 240 gms of MDA (Methylene Dioxy Amphetamine).

4. Lastly, learned counsel submitted that the petitioners are in judicial custody since 17.05.2024; investigation against the petitioners has already been completed and the trial of the case will take sufficiently long time, therefore, they may be enlarge on bail.

5. Per Contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail applications and submitted that the petitioners were sitting inside the offending vehicle from which, the contraband (greater than commercial quantity) was recovered. He further submitted that since the petitioners were carrying the contraband and therefore, the investigating agency has rightly filed challan against the petitioners and co-accused Ameer Hamja for illegally carrying the contraband (greater than commercial quantity).

6. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.

7. Having considered the rival submissions, facts and circumstances of the case, this Court finds that though the petitioners and co-accused were jointly carrying 240 gms of contraband in the offending vehicle, however, at the time when the search was being conducted, the contraband weighing 58.8 gms and 100 gms were recovered independently/separately from the conscious possession of the petitioners. The question as to whether the petitioners had jointly procured the recovered contraband and were carrying it for joint illegal trading of narcotic drugs, is a subject matter to be adjudicated upon by the learned trial Court on the basis of the material evidence produced before it. This Court also finds that the petitioners do not have any criminal antecedents; the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of “Rabi Prakash vs. State of Orisa” (Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.4169/2023) and “Mohd. Hussain @ Hussain Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)” in Spl. Leave Petition (Crl.) No.915/2023 has held that in the cases in which delay in trial is not attributa