Ved Ram S/O Jairam Vs the State of Rajasthan

[2026:RJ-JP:450]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 11228/2025

Ved Ram S/o Jairam, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Village Nangala Sewalgadh, Police Station Chata, District Mathura, Uttarapradesh (Petitioner Is In Sub Jail Hindoncity)

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ali Mohd. Khan For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rhishi Raj Singh Rathore, PP Mr. Shubham Sain, AAAG

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR Order

¶11

07/01/2026

¶12

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.10/2024 registered at Police Station Todabheem, District Gangapur City for the offence(s) under Sections 8/15, 8/18 and 8/20 of NDPS Act. 2. Learned counsel for the accused-petitioner submits that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case solely on the basis of disclosure statement of other co-accused Ratan Singh from whom commercial quantity of ganja was recovered. It is contended that apart from the disclosure statement of other coaccused Ratan Singh there is no substantive evidence available on the record indicating petitioner's involvement in the present case. The accused-petitioner is in custody since long and trial of the case may take considerable time. The charge-sheet against the petitioner under Section 8/29 of the NDPS Act has already been

(2 of 3)

[2026:RJ-JP:450]

[CRLMB-11228/2025]

submitted, therefore, the bail application of the accused-petitioner may be allowed.

¶17

Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application and contended that petitioner remained absconded for quite a bit period, thereafter he was arrested and supplementary charge-sheet was submitted against him under Section 8/29 of the NDPS Act. It is also contended that petitioner supplied commercial quantity of ganja, poppy-straw and opium to the main accused Ratan Singh from whom it was recovered. It is also contended that the petitioner was also found to be involved in similar nature of three cases, therefore, considering the above fact the bail application of the accused-petitioner may be dismissed.

¶18

Heard and perused the material available on record. 5. The main accused Ratan Singh has already been enlarged on bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this court vide order dated 20.08.2025. It is alleged against the petitioner that petitioner supplied commercial quantity of ganja, opium and poppy straw to the main accused Ratan Singh and apart from the disclosure statement of co-accused Ratan Singh there is no evidence available on the record indicating the petitioner's involvement in the alleged crime. The accused petitioner is in custody since long and trial of the case may take considerable time, therefore without commenting anything on the merits of the case, I deem it just and proper to enlarge the accused-petitioner on bail.

¶19

Accordingly, the bail application under Section 483 BNSS is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioner Ved Ram S/o Jairam in connection with FIR No.10/2024 registered at

(3 of 3)

[2026:RJ-JP:450]

[CRLMB-11228/2025]

Police Station Todabheem, District Gangapur City 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 trial Judge shall verify the address and contact details of the sureties through concerned SHO before releasing the accused-petitioners on bail.

¶24

The accused 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 shall send the presence report of the accused petitioner on the same day to the trial court every month. 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.

¶25

The accused-petitioner is also directed to submit his present address along with the mobile number to the concerned SHO within seven days of release and the concerned SHO shall verify the said address and the mobile number. In case if the petitioner changes his address or mobile number, he shall submit the same before the concerned SHO so also before the concerned learned trial court.

¶26

A copy of this order shall be sent to the concerned SHO for its strict compliance.

¶27

(PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J

¶28

ashu /49

Ved Ram S/O Jairam v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ved Ram S/O Jairam v. the 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

Smt. Mamta Sharma W/O Shri Pawan Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan

Sumit R Chauhan Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Radha Bai Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Vikas Banjara Son of Veeru Banjara Vs State of Rajasthan

Ramraj S/O Shri Bharatlal Vs State of Rajasthan

Mragendra Rav @ Bholuram S/O Shankar Lal Vs State of Rajasthan