KISHAN LAL v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
Court: High Court of Rajasthan
Bench: BALJINDER SINGH SANDHU
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Rajasthan judgment dated 2026-08-03. KISHAN LAL v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
[2026:RJ-JP:35933] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S. B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 2465/2026 CNR: RJHC010184482026 | URN: CRLMB / 5546U / 2026 Kishan Lal S/o Bagsu Balai, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Borda Aatun Ps- Pur, District- Bhilwara Raj. (At Present Lodged In Sub Jail Gangapur) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through P. p. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Suresh Nehra For Respondent(s) : Mr. Hanuman Prajapati, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BALJINDER SINGH SANDHU Order 03/08/2026 Heard learned counsel for the parties, and perused the material available on record. The petitioner has been arrested in connection with FIR No. 13/2026 of Police Station Karoi, District Bhilwara for the offences punishable under Sections 8/20 and 8/29 of NDPS Act. He has preferred this bail application under Section 483 of BNSS. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, in the present case, the contraband allegedly recovered, i. e. , 54.
170 kilograms of Ganja, was recovered from the possession of Aslam Mohammad. It is submitted that, so far as the present petitioner is concerned, he has no involvement in the alleged offence and no connection with the recovery has been established. The only link sought to be established by the prosecution is through the statements of the co-accused alleging that 6 kilograms of the [2026:RJ-JP:35933] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-2465/2026] recovered Ganja was to be supplied to the petitioner. It is submitted that, even if the said allegation is accepted at its face value, the quantity allegedly attributable to the petitioner is only 6 kilograms, which is below the commercial quantity. It is further submitted that the petitioner has been charge-sheeted only for the offence under Section 8 read with Section 29 of the NDPS Act.
Learned counsel further submits that the alleged contraband was never received by the petitioner and the entire allegation regarding its proposed supply is based merely on assumptions. It is submitted that the co-accused, Sher Singh, to whom 10 kilograms of Ganja was allegedly to be supplied, has already been enlarged on bail. The petitioner has been in judicial custody since 28. 01. 2026 and the charge-sheet has already been filed. The petitioner is no longer required for the purpose of investigation. It is further submitted that the petitioner has clean criminal antecedents and no criminal case of any nature is pending against him. Lastly, it is submitted that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take a considerable period of time. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application. This Court has considered the arguments raised by learned counsel for the petitioner. The contraband of 54.
170 kilograms of Ganja is alleged to have been recovered from co-accused Aslam Mohammad. So far as the petitioner is concerned, no contraband is alleged to have been recovered from his possession and the only allegation against him is based upon the statements of the co-accused to the effect that 6 kilograms of the alleged Ganja was to be supplied to him. The quantity allegedly attributable to the [2026:RJ-JP:35933] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-2465/2026] petitioner is below the commercial quantity. The petitioner has been charge-sheeted only for the offence under Section 8/29 of the NDPS Act. The petitioner is behind the bars since 28. 01. 2026, the charge-sheet has already been filed, and he is no longer required for the purpose of investigation. The co-accused, Sher Singh, to whom 10 kilograms of the alleged Ganja was allegedly to be supplied, has already been enlarged on bail.
Further, there is no criminal antecedent against the petitioner and the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude. Hence, keeping in view of the fact that conclusion of the trial of the case is likely to take time and the prosecution has not shown any apprehension of the petitioner fleeing away from justice, in case he is enlarged on bail and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court deems it just and proper to grant bail to the petitioner under Section 483 of BNSS. Accordingly, this bail application filed under Section 483 of BNSS is allowed and it is directed that petitioner –Kishan Lal S/ o Bagsu Balai shall be released on bail in connection with aforesaid FIR, if not wanted in any other case, provided he executes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- with two sound and solvent sureties of Rs.
50,000/- each to the satisfaction of learned trial court for his appearance before that court on each and every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till the completion of the trial. (BALJINDER SINGH SANDHU),J 10/Deepak
Source: Supreme Court eSCR. Dataset: Dattam Labs, CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.