Allowed

Bharat Lal @ Bharatu S/O Jiyalal v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC8 Sept 2025CRLMB/9849/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Rajasthan High Court allowed a bail application under the NDPS Act, noting that direct allegations of transporting drugs were against co-accused on bail and the recovered quantity was below commercial level, with insufficient evidence against the petitioner despite his prior criminal record.

What did the court decide?

The accused-petitioner was enlarged on bail by furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each and complying with appearance conditions.

Bharat Lal @ Bharatu S/O Jiyalal Vs State of Rajasthan — Narcotics (NDPS) | Rajasthan HC (2025)

¶1

[2025:RJ-JP:35910]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 9849/2025

¶4

Bharat Lal @ Bharatu S/o Jiyalal, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Mahukhurd, Police Station Gangapur City, District Sawai Madhopur (Rajasthan) (At Present Confined In District Jail Gangapur City).

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Manish Kumar Saini For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shree Ram Dhakar, PP

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR

¶11

Order

¶12

08/09/2025

¶13

The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 BNSS on behalf of accused-petitioner. The petitioner has been arrested in connection with FIR No.100/2025 registered at Police Station Gangapur City, District Sawai Madhopur for the offence(s) under Section 8/21 of the NDPS Act.

¶14

Learned counsel for the accused-petitioner submits that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that the recovery of smack was effected from the other co-accused Jaisingh and V.P. Singh and they have been enlarged on bail. There is no substantive evidence available on record to the fact that the petitioner was found to be involved in transporting the said smack to the other co-accused. The accusedpetitioner is in custody since 05.05.2025 and charge-sheet has

[2025:RJ-JP:35910]

[CRLMB-9849/2025]

(2 of 3)

already been submitted and trial of the case may take considerable time, therefore, the bail application of the accusedpetitioner may be allowed.

¶19

Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application and contended that the petitioner is a habitual offender and against him, 4 criminal cases under Section 8/21 of NDPS Act have been registered. In the present case also, the petitioner's involvement was found with the other co-accused and the petitioner was in regular touch with the other co-accused through mobile, from whom alleged quantity of smack was recovered, therefore, considering the above facts, the bail application of accused-petitioner may be dismissed.

¶20

Heard and perused the material available on record. 5. It is not desirable to express anything on the merits of the case. Considering the fact that the direct allegation of transporting the smack is against the other co-accused Jaisingh and V.P. Singh and they have been enlarged on bail. The alleged quantity of smack recovered from the other co-accused is below commercial quantity, apart from the disclosure statement of the other coaccused, there is no substantive evidence available on record alleging petitioner's involvement in the alleged crime. The petitioner is in custody since 05.05.2025 and charge-sheet has already been submitted and trial of the case may take considerable time, I deem it just and proper to enlarge the accused-petitioner on bail.

¶21

Accordingly, the bail application under Section 483 BNSS is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioner Bharat Lal

[2025:RJ-JP:35910]

[CRLMB-9849/2025]

(3 of 3)

@ Bharatu S/o Jiyalal, in connection with FIR No.100/2025 registered at Police Station Gangapur City, District Sawai Madhopur, 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. The concerned Court would verify the addresses of the petitioner as well as the sureties through concerned SHO and after satisfying that the given addresses in the bail bonds are correct, shall release the petitioner on bail.

¶26

The accused-petitioner is also directed to mark his presence on 25^th of every month till conclusion of trial before the concerned police station. The SHO of the concerned police station is directed to maintain a regular register marking the presence of the accused-petitioner and shall send the presence report of the accused-petitioner on the same day to the concerned Trial Court without any delay. In case of any breach to the above condition, the learned Public Prosecutor shall be free to move the application against the petitioner for cancellation of the bail before the concerned Court.

¶27

The accused-petitioner is also directed to submit his present address along with the mobile number to the concerned SHO and the concerned SHO shall verify the said address and the mobile number.

¶28

(PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J

¶29

Keshav/164

Bharat Lal @ Bharatu S/O Jiyalal v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bharat Lal @ Bharatu S/O Jiyalal 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

Laxminarayan S/O Purilal Vs the State of Rajasthan

Pappu Lal S/O Shyojiram Vs State of Rajasthan

Swaroop Chand @ Swaroop Meena Son of Shri Ramkishan Alias Kishan Lal Vs State of Rajasthan

Bheem Singh S/O Kanwar Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Jitendra S/O Jagdish Vs State of Rajasthan

Bharat S/O Sanjay Vs State of Rajasthan