Allowed

Rajmal S/O Bhanwarlal v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC26 Nov 2025CRLMB/12873/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application under Section 483 BNSS for arrest in FIR under Sections 8/21 NDPS Act, 1985 involving 14.19 grams of smack, below commercial quantity. Despite five criminal antecedents and prosecution objection, court granted bail conditioned on residing 250 kms away for six months and monthly police-station attendance.

What did the court decide?

Accused enlarged on bail: personal bond Rs.50,000 with two sureties of Rs.25,000 each; to reside/work 250 kms away for six months; monthly attendance at police station on 5th.

Rajmal S/O Bhanwarlal Vs State of Rajasthan — Narcotics (NDPS) | Rajasthan HC (2025)

¶1

[2025:RJ-JP:47992]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 12873/2025

¶4

Rajmal S/o Bhanwarlal, Aged About 56 Years, R/o Near Shiv Mandir, Dev Dungari, Azad Nagar, Madanganj, Kishangarh, P.S. Madanganj, District Ajmer (Raj.) (At Present Confined In Central Jail Ajmer)

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Devanshu Sharma
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Rhishi Raj Singh Rathore, PP
	Ms. Arti Sharma,PP

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN

¶11

Order

¶12

26/11/2025

¶13

The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 BNSS on behalf of accused-applicant. The accused-applicant was arrested in connection with FIR No. 0199/2025 registered at Police Station Bhinai District Ajmer for the offence(s) under Sections 8/21 of NDPS Act, 1985.

¶14

Learned counsel for the accused-applicant submits that the applicant is 56 years of age. It is further submitted that the applicant is the sole breadwinner of his family and is behind bars since 22.08.2025. It is further submitted that the contraband allegedly recovered is 14.19 grams of smack, which is below the commercial quantity.

¶15

Per contra , learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that the applicant has

(2 of 3)

[2025:RJ-JP:47992]

[CRLMB-12873/2025]

strong criminal antecedents at Police Station Madan Ganj, some of which are of a similar nature. It is further submitted that if the applicant is granted bail, he would pose a threat to society and may influence young persons.

¶20

Considering the arguments advanced by the counsel for the parties, considering that applicant is the sole breadwinner of his family; that contraband recovered is 14.19 grams of smack, which is below the commercial quantity and looking to the overall facts and circumstances of the case and material on record but without commenting on merits/demerits of the case, taking note of the fact that there are as many as five criminal antecedents registered against the applicant (For the sake of brevity reiterated at the end of this order); that the applicant is stated to be a threat to the society if he is enlarged on bail and keeping in mind the sacrosanct objective of Indian criminal reformative system and balancing the equity between right of the liberty, strong criminal antecedents and young age of applicant, this Court is inclined to enlarge the accused-applicant on bail with following conditions:

¶21

4.1 That the applicant will go for his employment/work and reside 250 kms away from the place of his current residence for a period of six months as the applicant is habitual offender in the vicinity of Police Station Madan Ganj.

¶22

4.2 That on every 5^th of successive month, applicant will mark attendance before the jurisdictional police station.

¶23

The criminal antecedents as recorded in the order dated

¶24

04.09.2025, are reproduced herein-below:

¶25

dz-	vijk/kh	,Q-vkbZ-vkj-	Ukke	vkjksih dh	fjgkbZ	U;k;ky;	orZeku
la-	dk uke	la[;k e;	Fkkuk	fxjQ~rkjh	fnukad	esa pkyku	fLFkfr
		fn0 o /kkjk		dh fnukad		is”k djus
						dh fnukad

[2025:RJ-JP:47992]

[CRLMB-12873/2025]

(3 of 3)

1-	jktey	251@2003 fnukad 31&07&03 /kkjk 8@21 ,uMhih,l	enuxat	243@03 fnukad 30&09&03	31&07&03	&	28&10&03	nks’keqDr 30&06&05
2-	&	381@2013 fnukad 21&10&13 /kkjk 4@25 vkElZ ,DV	enuxat	326@13 fnukad 28&10&13	21&10&13	&	&	tqekZuk 26&11&15
3-	&	353@2021 fnukad 30&11&21 /kkjk 8@21 ,uMhih,l	enuxat	72@22 fnukad 10&05&22	30&11&21	&	01&11&22	isafMax dksVZ
4-	&	319@2022 fnukad 22&07&22 /kkjk 8@21 ,uMhih,l	enuxat	447@22 fnukad 10&12&22	22&07&22	&	&	isafMax dksVZ
5-	&	359@2023 fnukad 31&08&23 /kkjk 8@21 ,uMhih,l	enuxat	356@23 fnukad 30&11&23	31&08&23	&	14&06&24	isafMax dksVZ

¶30

Accordingly, the bail application under Section 483 BNSS is allowed and it is ordered that accused-applicant Rajmal S/o Bhanwarlal shall be enlarged on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of learned trial Judge for his appearance before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing as and when called upon to do so.

¶31

(SAMEER JAIN),J

¶32

JKP/43

Rajmal S/O Bhanwarlal v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajmal S/O Bhanwarlal 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

Mukesh Kumar Sharma S/O Shri Chitarmal Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan

Ramsingh Yadav Son of Late Shri Banshi Vs State of Rajasthan

Choturam @ Chela S/O Ramniwas Gurjar Vs State of Rajasthan

Kulvindra Singh S/O Bhura Singh Vs the State of Rajasthan

Shyamlal S/O Khumaram Vs State of Rajasthan

Jitendra Kumar Nath S/O Shri Shankarnath Vs State of Rajasthan