Dismissed

Shahabuddin @ Abba S/O Sajauddin @ Tutiya @ Salauddin v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC18 Nov 2025CRLMB/9631/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court dismissed bail application of the second accused convicted under NDPS Act who had serious criminal antecedents spanning 2007 to 2025. Bench held applicant was a threat to society due to heinous prior convictions.

What did the court decide?

Bail application dismissed; direction to Jail Superintendent to appoint expert for reformation certificate.

Shahabuddin @ Abba S/O Sajauddin @ Tutiya @ Salauddin Vs… — Narcotics (NDPS) | Rajasthan HC (2025)

¶1

[2025:RJ-JP:46427]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 9631/2025

¶4

Shahabuddin @ Abba S/o Sajauddin @ Tutiya @ Salauddin, R/o Dadabadi At Present H. No. 134-A Behind Nagar Nigam Sajidehda P.s. Kishorpura District Kota Rajasthan. (At Present Confined At Central Jail Kota).

¶5

----Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Applicant(s)	: Mr. Ritesh Kumawat for Mr. Abdul Kalam Khan
For Respondent(s)	: Ms. Arti Sharma, PP with
	Mr. Rhishi Raj Singh Rathore, PP

¶10

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN

¶11

Order

¶12

18/11/2025

¶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.91/2025 registered at Police Station Kishorepura, District Kota City for the offence(s) under Section 8/21 of NDPS Act.

¶14

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the merely 13.44 gram smack was recovered from the applicant which is much below the commercial quantity as prescribed in the schedule of the NDPS Act.

¶15

Per contra , learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application. It is submitted that though commercial quantity is minimal but there are strong criminal antecedents against the applicant.

¶16

(2 of 3) [CRLMB-9631/2025]

¶17

[2025:RJ-JP:46427]

¶18

4. Criminal antecedents against the applicant is reproduced

¶19

here as under:-

¶20

¶21

Ø-la-	eqdnek ua- e; Fkkuk	/kkjk	Lh,l ua- e; fnukad	orZeku fLFkfr
1-	402@2007 Fkkuk&egkohj uxj	3@25 vk;q/k vf/kfu;e	235@2007	ltk
2-	11@2009 Fkkuk&jkeiqjk dksrokyh	376¼2½] 450] 458 Hkk-na-la-]4@25 vk;q/k vf/kfu;e	11@2009	nks’keqDr
3-	492@2014 Fkkuk&xqekuiqjk	454] 380 Hkk-na-la-	332@2014	iSf.Max dksVZ
4-	864@2013 Fkkuk&xqekuiqjk	341] 323] 307] 34 Hkk-na-la-	563@2013	nks’keqDr
5-	408@2015 Fkkuk&xqekuiqjk	379 Hkk-na-la-	284@2015	iSf.Max dksVZ
6-	133@2016 Fkkuk&xqekuiqjk	379 Hkk-na-la-	144@2016	iSf.Max dksVZ
7-	50@2017 Fkkuk&fd”kksjiqjk	4@25 vk;q/k vf/kfu;e	36@2017	iSf.Max dksVZ
8-	130@2017 Fkkuk&fd”kksjiqjk	19@54 vkcdkjh vf/kfu;e	105@2017	iSf.Max dksVZ
9-	204@2018 Fkkuk&fd”kksjiqjk	19@54 vkcdkjh vf/kfu;e	152@2018	iSf.Max dksVZ
10-	91@2019 Fkkuk&fd”kksjiqjk	19@54 vkcdkjh vf/kfu;e	65@2019	iSf.Max dksVZ
11-	103@2021 Fkkuk&fd”kksjiqjk	4@25 vk;q/k vf/kfu;e	86@2021	iSf.Max dksVZ
12-	17@2022 Fkkuk&fd”kksjiqjk	8@27 ,uMhih,l ,DV	16@2022	iSf.Max dksVZ
13-	64@2023 Fkkuk&fd”kksjiqjk	8@27 ,uMhih,l ,DV	40@2023	iSf.Max dksVZ
14-	195@2023 Fkkuk&fd”kksjiqjk	4@25 vk;q/k vf/kfu;e	147@2023	iSf.Max dksVZ
15-	100@2024 Fkkuk&fd”kksjiqjk	8@2 9,uMhih,l ,DV	85@2024	iSf.Max dksVZ
16-	19@2025 Fkkuk&fd”kksjiqjk	8@2 1,uMhih,l ,DV	24@2025	iSf.Max dksVZ

¶22

Heard and considered the matter.

¶23

Considering the arguments advanced by counsel for the parties, the fact that the criminal antecedents are reflected from year 2007 till 2025 on each and every side like NDPS, IPC, Excise Act which are heinous in nature and the applicant is prima facie a

(3 of 3)

[2025:RJ-JP:46427]

[CRLMB-9631/2025]

threat to the society, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the applicant on bail.

¶28

Accordingly, the present bail application is dismissed.

¶29

Concerned Jail Superintendent is directed to appoint an expert for reformation of pyscho-physical being of the applicant. It is made clear that prior to consideration of further bail application of the applicant, a certificate by the Expert so appointed shall be considered.

¶30

(SAMEER JAIN),J

¶31

CHANDAN /19

Shahabuddin @ Abba S/O Sajauddin @ Tutiya @ Salauddin v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shahabuddin @ Abba S/O Sajauddin @ Tutiya @ Salauddin 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

Brijlal S/O Maduram Vs State of Rajasthan

Chitransh Meena S/O Dharmendra Kumar Meena Vs State of Rajasthan

Ramgopal Agarwal S/O Shri Shantinarayan Agarwal Vs the State of Rajasthan

Chetram Alias Pappu S/O Late Jaganlal Vs State of Rajasthan

Kasveer Singh Son of Shri Gango Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Dinesh S/O Nanda Vs State of Rajasthan