Dismissed¶20

Laxman Son of Harphool v. Narcotic Control Bureau

Rajasthan HC7 May 2025CRLMB/2807/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

third bail application dismissed; Section 483 BNSS; NDPS Act 1985 Sections 8/20(b)(ii)(C) and 8/29; FIR VIII(IO)03/NCB/JPZU/2023; Narcotic Control Bureau Jaipur; bail refused; gravity of offence; criminal antecedents; expedite trial within four months; 8 of 10 prosecution witnesses recorded; District Jail Bundi; Dausa; Laxman son of Harphool; Sudesh Bansal; Rajasthan High Court Jaipur; CRLMB 2807/2025; 07/05/2025

What did the court decide?

Taking into consideration the gravity of the offence and the petitioner's criminal antecedents, the Court is not inclined to release the petitioner on bail. ¶19

Laxman Son of Harphool Vs Narcotic Control Bureau — Narcotics (NDPS) | Rajasthan HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶20

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, charged under Sections 8/20(b)(ii)(C) and 8/29 of the NDPS Act, 1985 in FIR No. VIII(IO)03/NCB/JPZU/2023, should be released on bail in this third bail application filed under Section 483 BNSS, considering the gravity of the offence, his criminal antecedents and the stage of the trial.

¶13

Court's answer

Taking into consideration the gravity of the offence and the petitioner's criminal antecedents, the Court is not inclined to release the petitioner on bail.

¶19

Ratio / Principle

The Trial Court shall expedite the trial and make endeavor to conclude it preferably within a period of four months, or earlier, from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶19

Key takeaways

Registrar (Judicial) is directed to send a copy of this order to the Trial Judge forthwith.obiter¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan, Bench at Jaipur (Sudesh Bansal J), order dated 07/05/2025: third bail application (S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 2807/2025) filed under Section 483 BNSS by Laxman s/o Harphool, presently confined in District Jail Bundi, in connection with FIR No. VIII(IO)03/NCB/JPZU/2023 (Police Station-NCB, Regional Office, Jaipur) for offences under Sections 8/20(b)(ii)(C) and 8/29 of the NDPS Act, 1985. His first bail application had been dismissed on merits (order dated 09.04.2024) and the second rejected (order dated 30.09.2024) with a direction to expedite the trial owing to his physical infirmities. With statements of 8 of 10 prosecution witnesses already recorded, the Court declined bail taking into consideration the gravity of the offence and the petitioner's criminal antecedents, directed the Trial Court to expedite the trial and endeavour to conclude it preferably within four months or earlier from receipt of the order, dismissed the application, and asked the Registrar (Judicial) to send a copy of the order to the Trial Judge forthwith.

¶1

[2025:RJ-JP:19264]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 3^rd Bail Application No. 2807/2025

¶4

Laxman Son Of Harphool, Resident Of Gunavtan Ki Dhani, Purohito Ka Bas ( Kali Pahadi) Dausa, Police Station Sadar, District Dausa (Raj.) ( At Present Confined In District Jail Bundi)

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

Narcotic Control Bureau, Through Special P.P.

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajveer Singh Gurjar For Respondent(s) : Mr. Tej Prakash Sharma, Spl.PP

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL

¶11

Order

¶12

07/05/2025

¶13

Instant 3^rd bail application has been filed by petitioner under Section 483 of BNSS in connection with FIR No. VIII(IO)03/NCB/JPZU/2023 registered at Police Station- NCB, Regional Office, Jaipur (Raj.) for offence under Section 8/20(b)(ii) (C) and 8/29 of NDPS Act, 1985.

¶14

The first bail application filed by the petitioner was dismissed on merits vide order dated 09.04.2024. Thereafter, second bail application was also rejected taking into consideration the nature of offence and criminal antecedents of petitioner vide order dated 30.09.2024, however taking into consideration the physical infirmities of petitioner, it was directed that the trial shall be expedited. Thereafter, this third bail application has been filed.

(2 of 2)

[CRLMB-2807/2025]

[2025:RJ-JP:19264]

It has been apprised to this Court that out of 10 prosecution witnesses, statement of 8 prosecution witnesses have been recorded.

¶19

In that view of matter and taking into consideration the gravity of offence and criminal antecedents of petitioner, this Court is not inclined to release the petitioner on bail, however this Court deems it just and proper to observe that the Trial Court shall expedite the trial and make endeavor to conclude the same preferably, within a period of four months or earlier, from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶20

Accordingly, this 3^rd bail application is hereby dismissed.

¶21

Registrar (Judicial) is directed to send a copy of this order to the Trial Judge forthwith.

¶22

(SUDESH BANSAL),J

¶23

TN/31

Laxman Son of Harphool v. Narcotic Control Bureau

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Laxman Son of Harphool v. Narcotic Control Bureau

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt Reena Kumari Bairwa W/O Shri Om Prakash Bairwa Vs State of Rajasthan

Manish Sharma Son of Shri Shrinarayan Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan

Mahesh Sharma Son of Shri Chandra Shekhar Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan

Deepa Meena D/O Mohan Lal Meena Vs State of Rajasthan

Norti Bairwa D/O Shivji Ram Bairwa, W/O Shri Pankaj Sisodiya, Vs State of Rajasthan

Subhash Chand Kumawat Vs State