[2026:RJ-JD:577]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 3^rd Bail Application No. 3419/2025 Prakash Chandra S/o Sri Kusumbalal Jatiya, Aged About 35 Years, Bawadi, Kheda Tehsil Bassi, District Chottorgarh (Lodged In Dist. Jail, Chittorgarh)

----Petitioner Versus Union Of India, Through Cbn ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. S.K. Bhati For Respondent(s) : Mr. K.S. Nahar, Spl. PP CBN Mr. Gopal singh HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

Order

07/01/2026

1. The jurisdiction of this court has been invoked by way of filing an application under Section 483 BNSS at the instance of accused-petitioner. The requisite details of the matter are tabulated herein below:

2. Briefly, the facts of the case are that On 03.12.2022, acting upon specific secret information regarding illegal narcotics trafficking, a preventive team reached the Gram Panchayat Bhawan, Khedi Nandbai–Tejpur Roz, Tehsil Begun, District Chittorgarh, at about 13:00 hours. Independent panch witnesses were associated and informed about the proposed search of a suspected motorcycle and rider coming from the Nandbai side.

At around 13:40 hours, a black Hero Super Splendor motorcycle without registration number was noticed approaching. The rider attempted to flee but was apprehended on the spot. On inquiry, he disclosed his identity as Prakashchand Jatiya and claimed ownership of the motorcycle. A bag affixed on the left side of the motorcycle was inspected, wherein a double-layered transparent polythene packet containing a black, pliable substance emitting a strong opium-like odour was recovered. Based on examination and experience, the substance was identified as opium. On weighment, the seized contraband, along with packing material, was found to be 3.50 kilograms whereafter samples and control samples were drawn, and the contraband was sealed at the spot as per prescribed procedure. On the basis of the said recovery, aforesaid FIR was registered under Sections 8/18 & 29 of the NDPS Act. After completion of investigation, a charge-sheet was filed and the accused was arrested on 23.05.2023. His first and second bail application being SBCRLMB Nos.8048/2023 & 11082/2024 were dismissed by this Court vide orders dated 19.08.2023 &

02.12.2024. Hence the instant bail application.

3. It is contended on behalf of the accused-petitioner that no case for the alleged offences is made out against him and his incarceration is not warranted. There are no factors at play in the case at hand that may work against grant of bail to the accused-

petitioner and he has been made an accused based on conjectures and surmises.

4. Contrary to the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail application and submits that the present case is not fit for enlargement of accused on bail.

5. I have heard and considered the submissions made by both the parties and perused the material available on record.

6. Upon a careful perusal of the record, it emerges that out of the total number of witnesses cited by the prosecution, statements of only few witnesses have been recorded till date, reflecting a conspicuous lack of substantive progress in the trial. The accused has remained in judicial custody for more than two and half years, and yet the proceedings have advanced at a languid pace. It is beyond cavil that Section 37 of the NDPS Act engrafts a stringent statutory embargo on the grant of bail in cases involving commercial quantity of contraband. However, such statutory rigour cannot be construed or applied in a manner that renders otiose the inviolable fundamental right to a speedy trial guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Wh