Allowed

Mithlesh Kumar S/O Late Dula Shah v. C.B.N.

Rajasthan HC11 Aug 2025CRLMB/7237/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Rajasthan allowed a third bail application for an accused under the N.D.P.S. Act. The court granted bail primarily because the main allegations against other co-accused were dismissed, deeming it unnecessary to comment on the merits of the impugned order.

What did the court decide?

Accused entrusted on bail via personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties of Rs. 25,000 each.

Mithlesh Kumar S/O Late Dula Shah Vs C.B.N. — Narcotics (NDPS) | Rajasthan HC (2025)

¶1

[2025:RJ-JP:30929]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 3^rd Bail Application No. 7237/2025

¶4

Mithlesh Kumar S/o Late Dula Shah, Aged About 34 Years, R/o House No. 385, Shrmik Colony, Purvi Pal Vistar Yojna, Ward No. 4, Police Station Basni, Jodhpur, Rajasthan. (Presently Confined In Central Jail, Kota).

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

C.B.N., Through Special PP

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Nitin Kumar Sharma, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Tej Prakash Sharma, Spl. PP

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR

¶11

Order

¶12

11/08/2025

¶13

The instant third bail application has been filed under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. on behalf of accused-petitioner. The accusedpetitioner has been arrested in connection with FIR No.04/2023, registered at Police Station CBN, District Kota, for the offence(s) under Sections 8/20(c) and 8/29 of the N.D.P.S. Act.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the accusedpetitioner has falsely been implicated under Section 8/29 of the N.D.P.S. Act. It is contended that the accused-petitioner is in custody since 28.04.2024 and the first bail application of the petitioner was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 25.11.2024. Thereafter, the co-accused namely Chhotu Ansari and Rajeshwari from whose possession the commercial quantity of ‘ ganja ’ were recovered were acquitted by the learned trial Court vide its judgment dated 03.07.2025. It is further contended that

[2025:RJ-JP:30929]

[CRLMB-7237/2025]

(2 of 3)

the contraband article recovered from the physical possession of other co-accused Chhotu Ansari and Rajeshwari were not proved. It is alleged against the petitioner that he was regularly getting the contraband articles from the other co-accused Chhotu Ansari and Rajeshwari. Apart from the statements of the co-accused recorded under Section 67 of the N.D.P.S. Act. There are no substantive piece of evidence available on record indicating the fact that the said contraband which was recovered from the other co-accused Chhotu Ansari and Rajeshwari, was supplied to the present petitioner, therefore, considering the above facts, the bail application of the accused-petitioner may be allowed.

¶19

Learned Special Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the grant of bail application. It is contended that this Court vide order dated 25.11.2024 dismissed the first bail application of the petitioner after considering the statements of the other coaccused recorded under Section 67 and N.D.P.S. Act and the Bank statements of petitioner and the other co-accused indicates the involvement of the petitioner in the alleged offence. It is argued that the judgment passed by the learned trial Court dated 03.07.2025 shall be challenged by the Department as the learned trial Court has wrongly appreciated the facts and without considering the legal position as enshrined in the matter of Khet Singh Vs. Union of India reported in 2002(2) Supreme 515 ,

¶20

whereby the Honble Supreme Court held that it is not necessary to make the ‘ panchnama ’ at the spot of seizure, therefore, considering the above aspect, the bail application of the accusedpetitioner may be dismissed.

¶21

Heard and perused the material available on the record.

[2025:RJ-JP:30929]

[CRLMB-7237/2025]

(3 of 3)

It is not desirable to express anything on the merits of the case. The main allegations of carrying the contraband articles were against the other co-accused, they have been acquitted, therefore, without commenting anything on the merits of the judgment passed by the learned trial Court, this Court deems it proper to enlarge the accused-petitioner on bail.

¶26

Accordingly, the instant third bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. is allowed and it is ordered that the accusedpetitioner- Mithlesh Kumar S/o Late Dula Shah, in connection with FIR No.04/2023, registered at Police Station CBN, District Kota, 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 Judge for his appearance before the Court concerned on all the dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.

¶27

(PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J

¶28

Ashwani Kr Srivastava /-19

Mithlesh Kumar S/O Late Dula Shah v. C.B.N.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mithlesh Kumar S/O Late Dula Shah v. C.B.N.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mubarik S/O Samsu Vs State of Rajasthan

Kirodi S/O Shri Jagan Vs State of Rajasthan

Deepak S/O Mahendersingh Vs the State of Rajasthan

Manish Khan S/O Akbardeen Khan Vs State of Rajasthan

Sunil Turi S/O Shri Bodha Turi Vs State of Rajasthan

Rohit S/O Nawal Kishore Vs State of Rajasthan