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) 2489

HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
KULDEEP MATHUR
GOGA BAI – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
CRLMB / 3999 / 2025



[2026:RJ-JD:4100]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 3999/2025 Goga Bai W/o Harmesh Singh, Aged About 40 Years, Nawa Hasta, Tehsil And District Fazilka Punjab. (At Present Lodged In Central Jail Sri Ganganagar)

----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Hakam Ali For Respondent(s) : Mr. Ramesh Dewasi, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR

Order

22/01/2026 This application for bail under Section 483 BNSS has been filed by the petitioner who has been arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.206/2024 registered at Police Station Srikaranpur, District Sri Ganganagar, for the offences under Sections 8/21, 27-

A, 28, 29 and 30 of NDPS Act.

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

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, as per the prosecution case, the contraband (heroin) was allegedly received near the Pakistan border by the co-accused persons namely Jaspal Singh, Shinder Singh, Paramjeet Singh, Balraj Singh and Jaspal Singh @ Jassu, having been dropped through a drone from across the border. It is further alleged that the co-accused Jaspal Singh @ Jassu, a close relative of the present petitioner, handed over the bag containing the contraband to Drishyan Singh and the present petitioner with instructions to return the same to him at Nawa Hasta. As per the prosecution, after the bag was returned, Jaspal Singh @ Jassu along with Drishyan Singh proceeded to Ladu Ka Mandi, where the contraband was allegedly handed over to one Veer in exchange for a sum of Rs. 9,00,000/-.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that there is nothing on record to indicate that, at the time the bag was handed over to the petitioner and her son, she had any knowledge that the same contained a narcotic substance, allegedly procured from the international border. It is further submitted that the specific allegation of procuring heroin through a drone from Pakistan has been levelled exclusively against the co-accused persons. The petitioner has been implicated solely on the basis of statements made by co-accused persons, without any independent or direct evidence establishing her involvement. Lastly, learned counsel submits that the petitioner, aged about 40 years, is in judicial custody, the investigation against her stands concluded, challan has been filed before the competent criminal Court and the trial is not likely to conclude in the near future. Therefore, she deserves the benefit of bail.

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application. However, he is not in a position to dispute that the contraband greater than commercial quantity was allegedly received at the international border by the co-accused persons namely Jaspal Singh @ Jassu, Shinder Singh, Paramjeet Singh, Balraj Singh, etc. The allegation against the present petitioner is limited to the extent that on being asked by the co- accused Jaspal Singh @ Jassu, she accompanied her son Drishyan Singh to Ladu Ka Mandi with the bag containing contraband and handed over the same to the petitioner.

Having considered the rival submissions and the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court prima facie finds that the contraband has not been recovered from the conscious possession of the present petitioner. The specific allegation of smuggling narcotic drugs from across the international border has been levelled against the co-accused persons. The petitioner has been implicated on the basis of statements of co-accused persons alone. The investigation qua the petitioner has already been completed and the trial is not likely to conclude in the near future.

Prima facie, the twin conditions stipulated under Section 37 of the NDPS Act stand satisfied. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits

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