Allowed

Dinesh Kumar S/O Ramesh Chand v. the State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC10 Feb 2025CRLMB/1951/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application under Section 483 BNSS allowed. The court considered the contraband quantity below commercial limit, absence of antecedents, and pendency of trial, granting bail with conditions of personal bond and monthly police reporting.

What did the court decide?

Accused released on bail on furnishing personal bond of Rs.50,000 and two sureties of Rs.25,000 each, subject to conditions including monthly reporting to police station.

Dinesh Kumar S/O Ramesh Chand Vs the State of Rajasthan — Narcotics (NDPS) | Rajasthan HC (2025)

¶1

[2025:RJ-JP:5795]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 1951/2025

¶4

Dinesh Kumar S/o Ramesh Chand, R/o Ward No. 4, Chapaneri, Police Station Bhinay, District Kekri (Raj.) (At Present In Sub Jail, Malpura, Tonk.)

¶5

----Accused-Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P.

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shyam Bihari Gautam, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Ms. Arti Sharma, PP

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN

¶11

Order

¶12

10/02/2025

¶13

The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.186/2024 registered at Police Station Lambaharisingh, District Tonk for the offences punishable under Sections 8/20 of NDPS Act. Later on, Police has filed charge-sheet in this matter.

¶14

It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel submits that alleged recovered contraband ganja (10.745 kgs) is below commercial quantity. He further submits that there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioner, charge-sheet has already been filed and trial of the case will take considerable time. He argues that the petitioner is in custody since

(2 of 3)

[2025:RJ-JP:5795]

[CRLMB-1951/2025]

30.11.2024 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose.

¶19

Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶20

I have considered the contentions.

¶21

Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner, especially the fact that alleged recovered contraband ganja is below commercial quantity; absence of criminal antecedents; charge-sheet has been filed and trial will take time in its conclusion as well as looking to the period of custody, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow the bail application.

¶22

This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner - Dinesh Kumar S/o Ramesh Chand shall be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court with the stipulation that he shall appear before that Court and any Court to which the matter is transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.

¶23

It is made clear that the accused-petitioner shall not involve in any other offence(s) during currency of the bail and he shall mark his presence in first week of every month in the concerned police station, till trial is concluded.

[2025:RJ-JP:5795]

[CRLMB-1951/2025]

(3 of 3)

Concerned SHO is directed to maintain a register recording the attendance of the petitioner, as directed above. In case the petitioner fails to mark his presence in the concerned police station, as directed above, the concerned SHO is directed to immediately report the matter to the concerned Court in this regard.

¶28

If any breach of these conditions is reported or come to the notice of the Court, the same shall alone be a reason for the trial Court to cancel the bail granted to him by this Court.

¶29

(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J

¶30

MADAN/204

Dinesh Kumar S/O Ramesh Chand v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dinesh Kumar S/O Ramesh Chand v. the 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

Mohan Prakash @ Monu S/O Chetsingh Vs State of Rajasthan

Ajjo @ Ajay S/O Dhore @ Dharmsingh Vs State of Rajasthan

Fakruddin S/O Abdula Vs State of Rajasthan

Udayraj Jogi S/O Shri Hukam Jogi Vs State of Rajasthan

Ramlaxman @ Pappu S/O Kalyan Vs State of Rajasthan

Olaye Friday Marvellous S/O Olaye Emeka Vs the State of Rajasthan