Allowed

Mandeep Singh @ Mannu S/O Sudarshpaal v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC3 Sept 2025CRLMB/10742/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Second bail application under the NDPS Act for possession of contraband below commercial quantity. Court noted chargesheet filed, trial would take time, and though the accused had a prior record, bail was considered appropriate.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted on personal bond of Rs. 1 lakh plus two sureties of Rs. 25,000 each; to appear before trial/final court on fixed dates and when called.

Mandeep Singh @ Mannu S/O Sudarshpaal Vs State of Rajasthan — Narcotics (NDPS) | Rajasthan HC (2025)

¶1

[2025:RJ-JP:35204]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2nd Bail Application No. 10742/2025

¶4

Mandeep Singh @ Mannu S/o Sudarshpaal, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Bapoda Police Station Sadar Bhiwani District Bhiwani Hariyana (At Present Confined In District Jail, Jhalawar (Raj).

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s) For Respondent(s)

¶10

: Mr. Rohit Khandelwal, Adv. : Ms. Manju Dave, PP

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMA SHANKER VYAS

¶12

Judgment / Order

¶13

03/09/2025

¶14

izkFkhZ&vfHk;qDr dh vksj ls viuh fu;fer tekur gsrq ;g f}rh; tekur izkFkZuk i= 483 ch-,u-,l-,l- ds vUrxZr iqfyl Fkkuk&>kyjkikVu] >kykokM esa ntZ izFke lwpuk fjiksVZ la[;k& 179@2025 vijk/k vUrxZr /kkjk 8@21] 29 ,u-Mh-ih-,l- ,DV esa is'k fd;k x;k gSA

¶15

fo}ku vf/koDrk izkFkhZ&vfHk;qDr us rdZ fn;k fd iwoZ esa vkjksi i= is'k gksus ds i'pkr uohu tekur vkosnu is'k djus dh Lora=rk ds lkFk tekur vkosnu okfil fy;k x;k Fkk] vfHk;qDr funksZ"k gS] izdj.k esa ckn vuqla/kku vkjksi i= is'k gks pqdk gS] dfFkr cjken Lokid lkexzh dh ek=k O;olkf;d ek=k ls de gS] vfHk;qDr fnukad 10-05-2025 ls vfHkj{kk esa gS] fopkj.k esa le; yxsxk] blfy, izkFkhZ&vfHk;qDr dks tekur dk ykHk fn;s tkus dk fuosnu fd;kA

¶16

blds foijhr fo}ku yksd vfHk;kstd us mDr rdksaZ dk fojks/k djrs gq, rFkk vfHk;qDr dk vkijkf/kd fjdkWMZ gksuk crkrs gq, ;g tekur vkosnu [kkfjt fd;s tkus dh izkFkZuk dhA

[2025:RJ-JP:35204]

[CRLMB-10742/2025]

(2 of 2)

nksuksa i{kksa dh cgl ds lanHkZ esa vfHkys[k ij miyC/k lkexzh dk voyksdu fd;kA

¶21

;|fi vfHk;qDr dk vkijkf/kd fjdkWMZ jgk gS] ijUrq gLrxr ekeys esa vfHk;qDr ds fo:) 24 xzke voS/k eknd inkFkZ Lesd dh cjkenxh dk vkjksi gS] izdj.k esa ckn vuqla/kku vkjksi i= is'k gks pqdk gS] fopkj.k esa le; yxus dh laHkkouk gSA

¶22

vr% izdj.k ds rF;ksa] ifjfLFkfr;ksa] izLrqr rdksaZ ,oa izkFkhZ&vfHk;qDr dh vfHkj{kk vof/k dks n`f"Vxr j[krs gq, izdj.k ds xq.k&nks"kksa ij fVIi.kh fd;s fcuk izkFkhZ&vfHk;qDr dks tekur dk ykHk fn;k tkuk mfpr izrhr gksrk gSA

¶23

ifj.kker% izkFkhZ&vfHk;qDr eUnhi flag mQZ eUuw iq= 'kqn'kZ iky dh vksj ls izLrqr ;g f}rh; tekur izkFkZuk i= Lohdkj dj vkns'k fn;k tkrk gS fd izkFkhZ bl ekeys esa fo}ku fopkj.k U;k;ky; ds larks"kizn] muds U;k;ky; ;k varfjrh U;k;ky; esa fu;r frfFk;ksa ij ,oa tc Hkh mls cqyk;k tk,] mifLFkfr gsrq ,d yk[k :i;s dk cU/k&i= rFkk ipkl&ipkl gtkj :i;s dh nks lqn`< izfrHkwfr;ka izLrqr dj izekf.kr djkos rks gLrxr izdj.k esa mls tekur ij fjgk dj fn;k tk,A

¶24

(UMA SHANKER VYAS),J

¶25

Mittal /35

Mandeep Singh @ Mannu S/O Sudarshpaal v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mandeep Singh @ Mannu S/O Sudarshpaal v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prem Singh S/O Shri Jhabburam Vs Umesh Chand S/O Moolchand

Smt. Afsana W/O Shri Sameer D/O Shri Abdul Shakur, Vs Mohmmad Shokeen S/O Shri Molabaksh

Kamal Singh @ Kamlesh Singh S/O Shri Phool Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Bhonri Devi W/O Ramotar Vs Vijaylakshmi Saxena W/O Amarnath Saxena

Motilal S/O Chandalal, Vs Moolchand S/O Kesarlal

Mangal Singh S/O Sh. Kanhaiya Lal Vs the New India Insurance Co. Ltd. through Divisional Manager