Mukesh S/O Kailashchand Vs State of Rajasthan — Narcotics (NDPS) | Rajasthan HC (2026)

Mukesh S/O Kailashchand Vs State of Rajasthan — Narcotics (NDPS) | Rajasthan HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Enlargement of accused-applicant Mukesh S/o Kailashchand on bail upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each, to the satisfaction of the trial Judge, for appearance before the court concerned on all dates of hearing.

Issue for consideration

Whether the accused-applicant, charged under Sections 8/18 of the NDPS Act, 1985 with recovery of approximately 16.67 kg of opium (exceeding the 2.5 kg commercial quantity) and in custody since 21.06.2023, should be enlarged on bail under Section 483 BNSS. +1 more

Court's answer

Bail was granted considering that the applicant is the sole bread earner of the family, aged about 30 years; that he has been behind bars since 21.06.2023; that the charge-sheet has already been filed; that there are no criminal antecedents pending against him; and looking to the overall facts and circumstances and material on record.

Ratio / Principle

The bail application under Section 483 BNSS is allowed and the accused-applicant Mukesh S/o Kailashchand shall be enlarged on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each, to the satisfaction of the trial Judge, with appearance before the court concerned on all dates of hearing.

Key takeaways

The court allowed the bail application relying upon a judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in which bail had been granted where the period of detention was two years and there were no criminal antecedents; the specific precedent relied upon is not identified in the text.ratio¶25
The bail decision was made without commenting on the merits or demerits of the underlying case.ratio¶20

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail granted — NDPS — commercial quantity. High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan, Jaipur Bench (Sameer Jain, J., 18.03.2026), S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 1392/2026 filed under Section 483 BNSS: accused arrested in FIR No. 263/2023, P.S. Bhawani Mandi, District Jhalawar, under Sections 8/18 of the NDPS Act, 1985, enlarged on bail. Approximately 16.67 kg of opium was stated to have been recovered (against the prescribed commercial quantity of 2.5 kg), per counsel from the joint possession of four persons; the Public Prosecutor opposed bail invoking Section 37 NDPS Act and State of Kerala Vs. Rajesh Kumar, urging that the period of incarceration is immaterial where contraband exceeds commercial quantity. The Court allowed bail considering that the applicant (aged about 30) is the sole bread earner, in custody since 21.06.2023, charge-sheet filed with trial at a slow pace (only 4 of 24 witnesses examined), and no criminal antecedents pending; it acted relying on a Supreme Court judgment granting bail after a two-year detention without criminal antecedents (specific precedent not identified in the order), expressly without commenting on merits/demerits. Accused to furnish a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each and appear before the trial court on all hearing dates.

[2026:RJ-JP:11648]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 1392/2026

Mukesh S/o Kailashchand, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Megabadi Paas Pachpahad, Police Station Bhawanimandi At Present R/o Guradiya Joga, Police Station Mishroli, District Jhalawar (Raj.) (At Present Confined In Sub Jail Bhawanimandi, Raj.)

----Applicant

Versus

State of Rajasthan through PP

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s)	: Ms. Anushree Sharma
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Vivek Sharma,PP

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN

Order

18/03/2026

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. 263/2023 registered at Police Station Bhawani Mandi District Jhalawar for the offence(s) under Sections 8/18 of NDPS Act, 1985.

Learned counsel for the accused-applicant has submitted that the applicant is sole bread earner of the family, aged about 30 years. It is further submitted that the applicant is behind bars since 21.06.2023 and that charge-sheet has already been filed in the instant matter and trial is going at snail's pace. It is further submitted that out of 24 witnesses only 4 witnesses have been examined till date. It is further submitted that the quantity of opium recovered from the applicant is approximately 16.67 kilograms which is much higher than the prescribed commercial

[2026:RJ-JP:11648]

[CRLMB-1392/2026]

(2 of 3)

quantity of 2.5 kilograms. It is next submitted that the said contraband is recovered from the joint possession of four persons. It is next submitted that there are no criminal antecedents pending against the applicant. Learned counsel has placed reliance upon the judgment encapsulated in Kamlesh Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2025 Supreme (SC) 1388, Ankur Choudhary Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh reported in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.4648/2024 and Arsad @ Arsad Alam Vs. The State of West Bengal reported in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.1148/2025 and has prayed that the present bail application should be allowed.

Per contra , learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application and by placing reliance upon the provisions enshrined under Section 37 of the NDPS Act and the ratio spelled out by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Kerala Vs. Rajesh Kumar reported in SLP (Crl.) Nos.7309−7312 of 2019 has submitted that the period of incarceration is immaterial in the cases where the quantity of contraband recovered is more than the prescribed commercial quantity.

Having heard the arguments advanced by the counsel for the parties, considering that the applicant is sole bread earner of the family, aged about 30 years; that the applicant is behind bars since 21.06.2023; that charge-sheet has already been filed in the instant matter; that there are no criminal antecedents pending against the applicant and looking to the overall facts and circumstances of the case and material on record but without commenting on merits/demerits of the case, this court is inclined

(3 of 3)

[2026:RJ-JP:11648]

[CRLMB-1392/2026]

to allow the bail application of the accused-applicant and enlarge him on bail.

Accordingly, the bail application under Section 483 BNSS is allowed relying upon judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court wherein period of two years with no criminal antecedents, bail has been granted and it is ordered that accused-applicant Mukesh S/o Kailashchand shall be enlarged on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/each to the satisfaction of learned trial Judge for his appearance before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing as and when called upon to do so.

(SAMEER JAIN),J

JKP/49