Dismissed¶17

Mahendra Gurjar Son of Roodmal v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC23 Mar 2026CRLMP/1311/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Section 457 CrPC supurdagi/custody of seized mobile refused and refusal upheld; NDPS Act S.8/20 case, FIR 1090/2019 PS Kanota Jaipur, seizure in Case No.164/2020; grounds: huge ganja recovery at accused's instance and inter-accused conversations, material evidence in mobile memory and card needed at trial; impugned order of Special Judge NDPS Cases Jaipur Metropolitan-I dated 16.01.2021 found cogent/reasoned/detailed, no interference; petition, stay application and pending applications dismissed; single bench Anoop Kumar Dhand; running head CRLMP-1311/2021.

What did the court decide?

The Court held that the impugned order dated 16.01.2021 is cogent, reasoned and detailed and does not require any interference; accordingly the instant petition stands dismissed. ¶17

Mahendra Gurjar Son of Roodmal Vs State of Rajasthan — Narcotics (NDPS) | Rajasthan HC (2026)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 1311/2021

¶3

Mahendra Gurjar S/o Roodmal, aged about 19 Years, R/o Balesar, Naurangpura, Police Station Viratnagar, Jaipur.

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of Rajasthan, through Public Prosecutor

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

For Petitioner(s) : None present For Respondent(s) : Mr.N.S. Dhakar, PP

¶9

JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND

¶10

Order

¶11

23/03/2026

¶12

By way of filing the instant criminal misc. petition, a challenge has been led to the impugned order dated 16.01.2021, passed by the Special Judge, NDPS Cases, Jaipur Metropolitan-I, by which the application submitted by the petitioner under Section 457 Cr.P.C. for getting possession of the seized mobile on supurdagi.

¶13

Contents of the petition indicate that the mobile of the petitioner has been seized by the Investigating Officer in Case No.164/2020 connection with the F.I.R. No.1090/2019 registered at Police Station Kanota, District Jaipur registered for the offence under Section 8/20 of NDPS Act.

¶14

An application was submitted by the petitioner for getting the possession of the said mobile on supurdagi, however, the same has been rejected by the Court below on the ground that huge quantity of Ganja was recovered at the instance of the

¶15

[CRLMP-1311/2021]

¶16

(2 of 2)

¶17

accused and several conversations were done with the mobile between him and other accused persons. Since the material evidence is present in the memory of the mobile and its card and the same would be required at the appropriate stage of the trial, considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, a cogent, reasoned and detailed order has been passed, which does not require any interference of this Court. Accordingly, the instant petition stands dismissed.

¶18

Stay application and all pending application, if any, also stand dismissed.

¶19

(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J

¶20

Aayush Sharma /21

Mahendra Gurjar Son of Roodmal v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahendra Gurjar Son of Roodmal v. 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

Bishan Lal Jangid S/O Khemchand Sharma B/C Jangid Vs State of Rajasthan

Banwari Vs State of Rajasthan and Ors.

Munesh Meena S/O Shri Bhagwan Sahay Meena Vs State of Rajasthan

Ramdin Khinchi S/O Shri Devilal B/C Balai Vs State of Rajasthan

Smt Neetu Sharma Vs Bhawani Mudgal

Mansingh S/O Udai Singh B/C Sondhya Rajput Vs State of Rajasthan