Allowed

Ravi Kumar @ Sanju Sorgar S/O Karm Singh @ Labar v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC17 Sept 2025CRLMB/11789/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a bail application filed under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. in a narcotics case. The Court held it just and proper to enlarge the petitioner on bail after considering the absence of substantive evidence against him regarding the transport of contraband.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on bail by furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each and complying with presence conditions.

Ravi Kumar @ Sanju Sorgar S/O Karm Singh @ Labar Vs State… — Narcotics (NDPS) | Rajasthan HC (2025)

¶1

[2025:RJ-JP:37944]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No.11789/2025

¶4

Ravi Kumar @ Sanju Sorgar S/o Karm Singh @ Labar, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Village Dusher Pur, P.S. Guhala, District Kaithar (Haryana) (Presently Confined In District Jail Jaipur)

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P.

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Majhar Hussain, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shree Ram Dhakar, PP

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR

¶11

Order

¶12

17/09/2025

¶13

The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. on behalf of accused-petitioner. The accused-petitioner has been arrested in connection with FIR No.149/2024, registered at Police Station Raisar, District Jaipur (Rural), for the offence(s) under Sections 8/15 of the N.D.P.S. Act.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the accusedpetitioner has falsely been implicated under Sections 8/29 and 8/25 of the N.D.P.S. Act. It is contended that there are no substantive evidence available on record to the fact that the petitioner deliberately allowed his vehicle to be used for transporting the contraband articles. The Police after investigation concluded that the vehicle was used by co-accused Vikram Kumar and the petitioner was not in possession of the said vehicle. The contraband article was recovered from the other co-accused

[2025:RJ-JP:37944]

[CRLMB-11789/2025]

(2 of 3)

Vikram Kumar and Ashok Kumar and there is no connectivity of the co-accused Vikram Kumar with the present petitioner. The Police has not collected any evidence which indicates that the petitioner was in contact with the other co-accused Vikram Kumar. It is further contended that the accused-petitioner is in custody since 16.12.2024 and trial of the case may take considerable time, therefore, the bail application of the accused-petitioner may be allowed.

¶19

Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the grant of bail application and contended that the accused-petitioner is a habitual offender and against him similar nature of case was registered in State of Haryana, therefore, the bail application of the accused-petitioner may be dismissed.

¶20

Heard and perused the material available on the record. 5. The recovery of contraband article containing 132 Kg 400 grams of poppy straw was effected from the possession of the other co-accused Ashok Kumar and Vikram Kumar. Considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner and after going through the contents of the charge-sheet, without expressing anything on the merits of the case, this Court deems it just and proper to enlarge the accused-petitioner on bail.

¶21

Accordingly, the bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. is allowed and it is ordered that the accused petitioner- Ravi Kumar @ Sanju Sorgar S/o Karm Singh @ Labar, in connection with FIR No.149/2024, registered at Police Station Raisar, District Jaipur (Rural), shall be enlarged on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial

[2025:RJ-JP:37944]

[CRLMB-11789/2025]

(3 of 3)

Judge for his appearance before the Court concerned on all the dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.

¶26

The accused-petitioner is also directed to mark his presence on 25^th of every month before the concerned Police Station till conclusion of the trial. The SHO of the concerned Police Station is directed to maintain a regular register marking the presence of the accused petitioner and shall send the presence report of the accused petitioner on the same day to the concerned trial Court every month without any delay. In case of any breach to the above condition, the learned Public Prosecutor shall be free to move the application against the petitioner for cancellation of the bail before the concerned Court.

¶27

The accused-petitioner is also directed that to submit his present address along with the mobile number to the concerned S.H.O. and the concerned S.H.O. shall verify the said address and the mobile number.

¶28

(PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J

¶29

Ashwani Kr Srivastava /-26

Ravi Kumar @ Sanju Sorgar S/O Karm Singh @ Labar v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravi Kumar @ Sanju Sorgar S/O Karm Singh @ Labar 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

Hamida B @ Tamanna Khan W/O Sunil D/O Shakil Ahmed Vs State of Rajasthan

Bhuralal @ Bhura S/O Radhakishan Vs State of Rajasthan

Vikas Meena S/O Omprakash Vs State of Rajasthan

Aasif S/O Samsu Vs the State of Rajasthan

Kulwant Singh S/O Shri Gurucharan Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Rakesh Singh @ Rauki S/O Puran Singh Rawat Vs State of Raj.