Dismissed¶28

Guman Lal Panwar S/O Dudhalal v. the State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC8 Apr 2026CRLMB/86/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Rajasthan HC Jaipur dismisses NDPS bail (S.483 BNSS; FIR 0336/2023 P.S. Suket, Ss.8 & 15 NDPS; petitioner implicated via S.8/29 on co-accused Suneel's statements; contraband below commercial quantity): 28 pending criminal cases (1984-2023, incl. three NDPS) show habitual misuse of bail liberty; parity with bailed co-accused (order dt. 16.12.2025, Bail Appn. 15732/2025) rejected for repeat offenders; custody since 15.12.2025; Ganesh Ram Meena, J., 08/04/2026.

What did the court decide?

Pendency of 28 other criminal cases spanning 1984 to 2023 shows the accused-petitioner re-commits offences after seeking bail, i.e., he is in the habit of misusing the liberty of bail. ¶22

Guman Lal Panwar S/O Dudhalal Vs the State of Rajasthan — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2026)

¶1

[2026:RJ-JP:14550]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 86/2026

¶4

Guman Lal Panwar S/o Dudhalal, Aged About 57 Years, R/o Village Tokada, Police Station Suwasara, District Mandsor (Madhya Pradesh) (Presently Confined In Sub Jail Ramganj Mandi).

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Anirudh Singh Shekhawat
For Respondent(s)	: Ms. Aarti Sharma, P.P.
	Mr. Sriram Dhaka,P.P.

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA

¶11

Order

¶12

08/04/2026

¶13

The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 on behalf of accused-petitioner in connection with FIR No. 0336/2023 registered at Police Station Suket, District Kota Rural for offence under Sections 8 and 15 of the N.D.P.S. Act 1985.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the contraband which has been recovered is less than the commercial quantity and the accused person from whose possession the contraband was recovered has already been enlarged on bail vide order dated 16.12.2025 by the Co-ordinate Bench in S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 15732/2025. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that the accused-petitioner has been implicated as an accused only with the aid of Section 8/29 of the

[2026:RJ-JP:14550]

[CRLMB-86/2026]

(2 of 3)

N.D.P.S. Act on the statements of the co-accused Suneel from whose possession the contraband has been recovered. Counsel further submits that the accused-petitioner is in custody since 15.12.2025.

¶19

Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application and submits that there is ample evidence on record which connects the accused-petitioner with the alleged offence. He also submits that accused-petitioner is already facing about 28 other criminal cases including the cases of offence punishable under the N.D.P.S. Act.

¶20

Considered the submissions made by the counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor.

¶21

On perusal of the rejection order passed by the Court below it is revealed that as many as 28 other criminal cases are pending against the petitioner out of which three cases pertain to offences punishable under the N.D.P.S. Act.

¶22

The pendency of large number of cases against the accused-petitioner which are of the period beginning from 1984 to 2023 speaks that accused-petitioner after seeking bail in a criminal case commit the offence again and again, meaning thereby, he is in a habit of misusing the liberty of bail. One of the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that coaccused from whose possession the contraband was recovered has already been enlarged on bail, so as to maintain the parity petitioner may be enlarged on bail, the Court is of the opinion that the ground of parity cannot be made applicable for such kind of

(3 of 3)

[CRLMB-86/2026]

[2026:RJ-JP:14550]

persons who are in habit of committing offence again and again after misusing the liberty of bail.

¶27

Taking into consideration the allegations against the accused-petitioner and more particularly the fact that as many as 28 other criminal cases are pending against the accusedpetitioner, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the accusedpetitioner on bail.

¶28

Accordingly, this bail application is dismissed.

¶29

(GANESH RAM MEENA),J

¶30

SHRUTI SHARMA /23

Guman Lal Panwar S/O Dudhalal v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Guman Lal Panwar S/O Dudhalal v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prahlad Singh S/O Poor Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Yusuf @ Isuf @ Daldi S/O Kamar Khan Vs State of Rajasthan

Hasan S/O Sharif Mohammed Vs State of Rajasthan

Hemant Kumar S/O Prakash Vs State of Rajasthan

Tareef S/O Ruddar Vs State of Rajasthan

Sohanlal @ Sonu Balas S/O Malaram Vs State of Rajasthan