[2026:RJ-JP:17752]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No.

12518/2025 Pramod Kumar S/o Shri Omprakash, R/o 1407, Sansi Basti, Near Radha Swami Bhawan, Bhagwan Ganj, Ajmer. (At Present Confined In Central Jail Ajmer, District Ajmer).

----Petitioner Versus C.B.N., Through Special PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Nirmal Kumar Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Tej Prakash Sharma, S.P.P.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA

Order

27/04/2026

1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 on behalf of accused-petitioner in connection with FIR No. 14/2025 registered at C.B.N. Jaipur for offence under Sections 8/22 of the N.D.P.S.

Act 1985.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the accused-petitioner has been implicated in this case on the basis of the false and fabricated facts of recovery of the alleged contraband. Counsel further submits that there is violation of mandatory provisions of Section 42 of the NDPS Act. He further submits that photography of seizure was not done by the Competent Officer i.e. Superintendent. He also submits that no gazetted officer was present while making the seizure, as is required under law. Learned counsel further submits that there is violation of provisions of Sections 103 and 105 of the B.N.S.S.

2023.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that no independent witness has been associated with the seizure of the alleged contraband and there are no details in that regard. Counsel further submits that the samples were sent to the FSL after 72 hours, whereas the requirement under law is that the samples be sent within 72 hours.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner also agitated that the application for inventory was submitted on 05.08.2025, whereas it was prepared on 29.09.2025 because of lapses on the part of the prosecution. Counsel further submits that the signature of the Gazetted Officer on the Panchnama and the person who received the secret information, as regards the transportation of the alleged contraband, the same Police personnel has been made the Investigating Officer of the accused-petitioner. He also submits that the accused-petitioner is in custody since 31.07.2025 and Police after completion of the investigation has submitted charge-

sheet in the matter.

5. Learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the Central Bureau of Narcotics (C.B.N.) submits that the alleged contraband, which has been recovered from the possession of the accused-petitioner, is 114 gram Mephedrone (for short’MD). As per the schedule, the prescribed commercial quantity of MD is 50 grams, meaning thereby, the contraband recovered from the possession of the accused-petitioner is much above than the commercial quantity. He further submits that the accused- petitioner is not able to fulfill the satisfaction as required under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, and in view of the evidence available on record, it cannot be said that he is not guilty of the offence.

6. Considered the submissions made by the counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Special Public Prosecutor so also perused the case diary.

7. As per facts on record, the secret information was received on 31.07.2025 that the person would be coming with the Narcotic Drug MD. On the basis of said information, the Police Officer was deputed for search and seizure and thereafter, search and seizure was made and 114 gram MD was recovered from the possession of the accused-petitioner, which is much above than the commercial quantity.

8. Since the recovery of a Narcotic Drug has been made from the possession of the accused-petitioner, which is more than the commercial quantity and looking to the evidence collected during investigation, it cannot be said that there is no prima facie evidence that the petitioner is not guilty of offence alleged against him.

9. As regards the other submissions made by the counsel for the p