[2026:RJ-JD:16727]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2^nd Bail Application No. 11565/2025 Mahendra S/o Sukhram, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Near Sati Mata Mandir,village Joliyali,police Station Jhanwar,district Jodhpur,at Present Kanaiya Colony,guruo Ka Talab,santdham Road,police Station Partapnagar,district Jodhpur , Rajasthan (Lodged In Central Jail,jodhpur) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. K.L. Thakur Mr. Lavish Bhati Mr. Himanshu Bumb For Respondent(s) : Mr. Narendra Singh Gehlot, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR

Order

09/04/2026 This second application for bail under Section 483 BNSS has been filed by the petitioner who has been arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.98/2024 registered at Police Station Pratapnagar, District Jodhpur, for the offences under Sections 8/15 of NDPS Act and Sections 379 and 473 of IPC.

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

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, as per the prosecution, the police received information that the petitioner had parked a Brezza car bearing registration No. RJ-39-CA-3495, allegedly loaded with contraband (poppy husk/straw), outside his house near Karni Mata Mandir, Guruo Ka Talab. Acting upon the said information, when the police reached the petitioner’s house, they found the car parked outside; however, the petitioner was not present there. After following the procedure prescribed under the NDPS Act, the vehicle was searched, and contraband weighing

124.200 kgs. was recovered.

Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case on the basis of conjectures and surmises. Drawing the attention of this Court to the charge- sheet papers, it was submitted that the petitioner was not present at the place of recovery; the offending vehicle does not belong to him; and there is no witness who has seen the petitioner driving or parking the said vehicle.

Learned counsel further submitted that, as per the prosecution, the petitioner had allegedly procured the contraband from one Mahendra Singh, resident of Bhawgarh, Mandsaur (M.P.); however, there is no material on record to establish any connection between the petitioner and the said person. It was also submitted that the call detail records and location data do not establish the presence of the petitioner at or near the place of recovery.

Lastly, learned counsel submitted that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 30.01.2025; the investigation has already been completed; and the trial is likely to take considerable time. Therefore, it was prayed that the benefit of bail be granted to the accused-petitioner.

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the bail application.

Having considered the rival submissions and the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court prima facie finds that the contraband in the present case was not recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner; the offending vehicle does not belong to him; and the prosecution case appears to be based primarily on information allegedly disclosed by the petitioner while in custody. Prima facie, no cogent material is available on record to establish any nexus between the petitioner and co-accused Mahendra Singh or to indicate his presence at the place of recovery.

The twin conditions stipulated under Section 37 of the NDPS Act appear to be satisfied in the present case. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

Consequently, the second bail application under Section 483 BNSS is allowed. It is ordered that the accused-petitioner Mahendra S/o Sukhram arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.98/2024 registered at Police Station Pratapnagar, District Jodhpur, shall be released on bail, if not wanted in any other case, provided he