Shiv Singh S/O Lohare Vs State of Rajasthan

[2025:RJ-JP:6655]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 16541/2024

Himmat Singh S/o Shri Bachu Singh, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Khedi Shesh, P.s. Sadar Hindauncity, District Karauli, Rajasthan. (At Present In Central Jail Karauli).

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

Connected With

¶10

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 494/2025 Pappu S/o Chanda @ Lalchand, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Kanwarpura, P.s. Ghatoli District Jhalawar (Rajasthan) (Confined In Karoli Jail)

¶11

----Petitioner

¶12

Versus

¶13

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶14

----Respondent

¶15

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 495/2025

¶16

Shiv Singh S/o Lohare, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Meena Badoda, Police Station Wazirpur, District Sawai Madhopur (Rajasthan) (Presently Confined In District Jail, Karauli).

¶17

----Petitioner

¶18

Versus

¶19

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶20

----Respondent

¶21

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr.	Pradeep Sharma
	Mr.	Rohit Khandelwal
	Mr.	Rajneesh Gupta
	Mr.	Utkarsh Goyal
For Respondent(s)	: Mr.	N.S. Dhakad, P.P.
	Ms.	Arti Sharma, P.P.

¶22

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN

¶23

Order

¶24

14/02/2025

¶25

The instant bail applications have been filed under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. on behalf of the petitioners, who have been arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.213/2024, registered at

(2 of 3)

[2025:RJ-JP:6655]

[CRLMB-16541/2024]

Police Station Kudgaon, District Karauli, for the offence(s) punishable under Section(s) 8/21 & 8/29 of the N.D.P.S. Act.

¶30

It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that the accused-petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel submits that the matter pertains to recovery of alleged contraband i.e. Smack (8 grams). The petitioners are in judicial custody since the date of arrest. Charge-sheet has been filed in the matter. Trial of the case will take considerable time to conclude, till then, keeping the petitioners behind the bars would serve no fruitful purpose.

¶31

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioners and submits that there are criminal antecedents of the petitioners, namely Himmat Singh & Shiv Singh, as one case of N.D.P.S. Act, is pending against them. However, there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioner, namely Pappu.

¶32

I have considered the contentions.

¶33

Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by both the parties, especially the fact that alleged recovered contraband is below the commercial quantity; challan has been filed; trial will take time in its conclusion; looking to the custody period of the petitioners, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow the bail applications.

¶34

The bail applications are accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioners - Himmat Singh S/o Shri

[2025:RJ-JP:6655]

[CRLMB-16541/2024]

(3 of 3)

Bachu Singh, Pappu S/o Chanda @ Lalchand & Shiv Singh

¶39

S/o Lohare, shall be released on bail provided each of them 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 each of them shall appear before that Court and any court to which the matter is transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when they are called upon to do so.

¶40

It is made clear that the accused-petitioners shall not involve in any other offence(s) during currency of the bail and they shall mark their presence in 1^st week of every month in the concerned Police Station.

¶41

Concerned S.H.O. is directed to maintain a register recording the attendance of the petitioners. In case the petitioners fail to mark their presence in the concerned Police Station, as directed above, the concerned S.H.O. is directed to immediately report the matter to the concerned Court in this regard.

¶42

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 the petitioners by this Court.

¶43

The observations made herein-above is only for decision of the instant bail applications and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner.

¶44

(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J

¶45

SAHIL SONI /399-401

Shiv Singh S/O Lohare v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shiv Singh S/O Lohare 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sawan S/O Radheyshyam Vs State of Rajasthan

Mausam Ali @ Mausam S/O Asru Vs State of Rajasthan

Salim Kureshi @ Pappu S/O Shri Makkhan Kureshi Vs State of Rajasthan

Yogesh S/O Veersingh Vs State of Rajasthan

Manoj Dholda S/O Shri Hoshiyar Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Balkishan @ Ballu Prajapat S/O Shri Gyanchand Prajapat Vs State of Rajasthan