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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Raj) 2165

HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
KULDEEP MATHUR
CHHOTU SINGH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
CRLMB / 860 / 2026



##PAGE1##

[2026:RJ-JD:6439]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT

JODHPUR

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous II Bail Application No. 860/2026

Chhotu Singh S/o Unkar Singh, Aged About 32 Years, Resident

Of Sankal Kheda Police Station Bijaypur District Chittorgarh (At

Present Lodged In District Jail Pali)

----Petitioner

Versus

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kailash Khilery

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Surendra Bishnoi, PP

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR

Order

04/02/2026

1. This second application for bail under Section 483 BNSS (439

Cr.P.C.) has been filed by the petitioner who has been arrested in

connection with F.I.R. No.242/2023, registered at Police Station

Siriyari, District Pali, for offences under Sections 8/18 & 29 of

NDPS Act.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that as per the

prosecution, 19.10.2023, during a police blockade (nakabandi), a

public transport bus bearing number RJ-22-PA-4139 of Rajasthan

Roadways was checked and 4.530 kgs. of contraband opium was

recovered from the conscious possession of the co-accused –

Ganpat Singh. Learned counsel submitted that the co-accused –

Ganpat Singh (S.B. Criminal Misc. II Bail Application

No.9913/2024) has already been enlarged on bail by the co-

ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 06.09.2024. Learned

counsel submitted that the co-accused – Ganpat Singh while in

(Uploaded on 04/02/2026 at 05:11:10 PM)

(Downloaded on 07/02/2026 at 03:26:56 AM)

##PAGE2##

[2026:RJ-JD:6439] (2 of 6) [CRLMB-860/2026]

judicial custody divulged an information that the recovered

contraband was procured by him from the present petitioner.

Learned counsel submitted that apart from the disclosure

statements of the co-accused – Ganpat Singh, there is no other

direct/circumstantial evidence available on record indicating

involvement of the petitioner in commission of the alleged crime.

3. Lastly, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the

petitioner is in judicial custody; the investigation against him has

already been concluded; the challan against him has already been

filed before the competent criminal Court by the Investigating

Agency; and therefore, the trial against him is not likely to be

concluded in the near future. On these grounds, learned counsel

implored this Court to enlarged the petitioner on bail.

4. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently

opposed the bail application and submitted that in the present

case, the allegations against the present petitioner is of supplying

contraband opium greater than commercial quantity was

recovered from the conscious and exclusive possession of the co-

accused – Ganpat Singh. Learned counsel submitted that looking

to the seriousness of the allegations levelled against him, he does

not deserve to be enlarged on bail. However, he was not in a

position to refute the fact that the co-accused – Ganpat Singh has

already been enlarged on bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this

Court.

5. Heard learned counsel for the parties at Bar. Perused the

material available on record.

(Uploaded on 04/02/2026 at 05:11:10 PM)

(Downloaded on 07/02/2026 at 03:26:56 AM)

##PAGE3##

[2026:RJ-JD:6439] (3 of 6) [CRLMB-860/2026]

6. The order dated 06.09.2024 passed by the co-ordinate

Bench of this Court while enlarging the co-accused – Ganpat Ram

on bail is reproduced below for ready reference:

“1. Arrested in furtherance of FIR No.242/2023, registered at Police

Station Siriyari, District Pali, petitioner has filed this application

under Section 439 Cr.P.C. (Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023) for

releasing him on bail. The petitioner is charged for offences

punishable under Section 8/18 of the NDPS Act.

2. Earlier, applicant made an endeavor for seeking bail by way of

filing first bail application which was disposed of without considering

the merits of the case since it was not pressed. Now post recording

of statement of seizure officer, this second bail application has been

moved.

3. The accusation against the petitioner-accused is that on

19.10.2023, during a police blockade, a pu

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