Dismissed¶27

Biram S/O Shri Bapulal v. State of Rajasthan

Anticipatory bail – Section 482 BNSS

Rajasthan HC5 May 2026CRLMB/3280/2026

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail dismissed under s.482 BNSS; NDPS Act ss.8/15, 8/25, 8/29; FIR No.130/2025 dated 17.07.2025, P.S. Harnavda Shahji, District Baran; 21 kg poppy straw recovered from car; co-accused Jitu and Kalu Lal bailed 27.08.2025, Mohan Lal bailed 08.08.2025; petitioner Biram shown absconding and not co-operating in investigation; prior rejection by Special Judge, NDPS Cases, Chhabra on 12.02.2026; Rajasthan High Court Jaipur, S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 3280/2026 (CRLMB-3280/2026), Justice Ashok Kumar Jain, decided 05/05/2026.

What did the court decide?

On consideration of the entire material and the police report, the court held that the petitioner is not co-operating in the investigation and this is not a fit case to enlarge him on anticipatory bail. ¶22

Biram S/O Shri Bapulal Vs State of Rajasthan — Narcotics (NDPS) | Rajasthan HC (2026)

¶1

[2026:RJ-JP:19181]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 3280/2026

¶4

Biram S/o Shri Bapulal, R/o Madanpuriya, Police Station Ghatoli, District Jhalawar (Rajasthan).

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Narsi Prasad Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vijay Singh Yadav, PP

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN

¶11

Order

¶12

05/05/2026

¶13

The instant bail application is preferred by the petitioneraccused Biram S/o Shri Bapulal , under Section 482 of BNSS for anticipatory bail in a matter arising out of FIR No.130/2025 dated 17.07.2025 registered at Police Station Harnavda Shahji, District Baran for the offence under Sections 8/15 and 8/25 of NDPS Act.

¶14

Learned Special Judge, NDPS Act Cases, Chhabra, District Baran, has dismissed the anticipatory bail application of the present petitioner on 12th February 2026.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner submit that as per facts of the case, on inspection of a car, 21 kg of poppy straw was recovered from possession of Jitu and Kalu Lal and both were released on bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Hon'ble Court on 27.08.2025. He further submits that only on interrogation note of Jitu and Kalu Lal, the petitioner was arrayed as an accused as supplier of contraband articles. He further submits that even

[2026:RJ-JP:19181]

[CRLMB-3280/2026]

(2 of 3)

Mohan Lal was named for the offence under Section 8/29 of NDPS Act and he was granted bail on 08.08.2025 by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Hon'ble Court. He further submits that in the entire case, there is no need of custodial interrogation as there is no evidence to connect the petitioner with the alleged crime.

¶20

Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that the allegations are grave and serious in nature. 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material placed on record. 6. On basis of recovery of poppy-straw in the night of 16-17 July, 2025 from a car, SHO Police Station Harnavda Shahji, District Baran has registered an FIR No. 130/2025 under Sections 8/15 and 8/25 of the NDPS Act. Both the arrested accused Jitu and Kalu Lal were released on bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 27.08.2025. Another person Mohan Lal was named as an accused under section 8/29 of NDPS Act for selling poppy-straw to Jitu and Kalu Lal and he was also released on bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 08.08.2025.

¶21

The police report suggests that the present petitioner is involved in dealing of contraband article poppy-straw, found in possession of Jitu and Kalu Lal. The police report also indicate that the present petitioner is absconding and currently, he is not within the reach of police.

¶22

Having considered the entire material and placed on record and also the report of the police, I am of the considered view that the petitioner is not co-operating in the investigation and in such a situation, this is not a fit case to enlarge the present petitioner on

[CRLMB-3280/2026]

[2026:RJ-JP:19181]

(3 of 3)

anticipatory bail by allowing an application under section 482 of BNSS.

¶27