Suraj Kumar Bagri S/O Kishan Gopal Bagri Vs State of Rajasthan

¶1

[2025:RJ-JP:43818]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous II^nd Bail Application No. 10771/2025

¶4

Suraj Kumar Bagri S/o Kishan Gopal Bagri, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Bagri Mohalla Aklera, Police Station Aklera, Dist. Jhalawar (Raj.) (Petitioner Is In Sub Jail Ramganjmandi)

¶5

Mukesh Meena @ Golu S/o Radheshyam Meena, Aged About 21 Years, R/o Katfala Police Station Aklera, Dist Jhalawar (Raj) (Petitioner Is In Sub Jail Ramganjmandi).

¶6

----Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶9

----Respondent

¶10

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Ali Mohammed Khan,
	Ms. Shazadi Bano
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Sudesh Saini,PP

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL

¶12

Order

¶13

01/11/2025

¶14

Pursuant to the Order dated 30.10.2025 passed by this Court, explanation of Registrar (Judicial) and concerned Presiding Officer, has been perused and same be taken on record.

¶15

Instant second bail application has been filed by petitioners under Section 483 of BNSS in connection with FIR No.196/2023 registered at Police Station Kanwas, District Kota Rural for the offence(s) under Sections 8/15 of NDPS Act.

¶16

Both the accused petitioners have been stated to be in custody in the present FIR since 16.09.2023 and except recording statements of two prosecution witnesses, there is no progress in

[2025:RJ-JP:43818]

[CRLMB-10771/2025]

(2 of 3)

the criminal trial, hence, it has been argued by counsel for petitioners that the prolonged incarceration of petitioners, without trial, violates their fundamental rights as enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India as also their right of speedy trial. In addition, it has been argued that there is clear violation of mandatory provision of Section 52A of the NDPS Act, since contraband (119 Kg Poppy Husk) was recovered on 16.09.2023, inventory was prepared on 21.09.2023, and the sample was sent to forensic laboratory for examination, after about 12 days i.e. on 03.10.2023, whereas the Statue requires that such sample be sent within 72 hours of the seizure.

¶21

In support of his submission, counsel for petitioners has relied upon and referred judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Mohd. Muslim Alias Hussain Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) [(2023) 18 SCC 166] , Hardik Harsadbhai Parmar v. Sate of Gujarat [2025 Supreme (Online) (SC) 11156] and the Order dated 13.08.2025 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Rambabu v. State of Rajasthan: Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal) No.5648/2025 .

¶22

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application, however, does not dispute that as per factual report of trial Court dated 30.10.2025, after framing of charges on 14.06.2024, only statements of PW/1- Patram & PW/2- Mahipal, have been recorded and despite summoning prosecution witnesses time and again, no-one has turned up and prosecution evidence has not proceeded further. Public Prosecutor does not dispute that petitioners have no criminal antecedents in respect of offences under the NDPS Act, 1985.

[2025:RJ-JP:43818]

[CRLMB-10771/2025]

(3 of 3)

Having considered the rival submissions of both the parties and in view of the period of incarceration of petitioners since more than 2 years in the present FIR, and the facts that as per factual report dated 30.10.2025, progress of trial in the present criminal case has not progressed, due to which fundamental right of life and liberty of petitioners, enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, is being infringed; there are no criminal antecedents of petitioners; taking guidance from the judgments and order of Hon’ble Supreme Court as referrred hereinabove, but without commenting on merits of the case, this Court deems it just and proper to release the petitioners on bail.

¶27

Accordingly, the second bail application is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioners (i) Suraj Kumar Bagri S/o

¶28

Kishan Gopal Bagri & (ii) Mukesh Meena @ Golu S/o Radheshyam Meena shall be released on bail, provided they furnish a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for their appearance before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing as and when called upon to do so, on following conditions:-

¶29

(i) that the petitioners shall not repeat the similar nature of offence during bail granted by this Court.

¶30

(ii) that the petitioners shall not leave Districts- Kota & Jhalawar, where the criminal trial is going on, without leave of the trial Court.

¶31

(iii) that the petitioners shall not tamper with and influence any of the prosecution witnesses or evidence; (iv) that if the petitioners commit breach of any of the conditions, the respondents shall be free to move application for bail cancellation of accused-petitioners.

¶32

(SUDESH BANSAL),J

¶33

Sachin/S-86

Suraj Kumar Bagri S/O Kishan Gopal Bagri v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suraj Kumar Bagri S/O Kishan Gopal Bagri v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ratiram S/O Shyonarain Vs Ramniwas S/O Gograj

Khalid Hussain @ Kale S/O Gutkan, Vs Jahuri W/O Gafur Khan

Kale @ Khalid Hussain Son of Gutkan, Vs Jahuri Wife of Gafur Khan

Ratan Singh S/O Narayan Singh Panwar, Vs Rajendra Singh Panwar S/O Narayan Singh Panwar

Madhuri Widow of Prahlad Singh, Vs Rangbahadur Singh Son of Dashrath Singh Alias Jassu Singh

Sita Ram Tailor S/O Late Shri Bhagwanaram Vs Mahendra Kumar Jain S/O Shri Phool Chand Jain