CRLMB/8227/2026 of YASH BADETIYA S/O SHRI AJAY KUMAR BADETIYA Vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN on 3 August 2026

Order

03/08/2026 izkFkhZ@vfHk;qDr dh vksj ls viuh fu;fer tekur gsrq ;g tekur izkFkZuk i= varxZr /kkjk 483 Hkkjrh; ukxfjd lqj{kk lafgrk iqfyl Fkkuk vkn'kZ uxj ftyk t;iqj flVh ¼iwoZ½ esa ntZ izFke lwpuk fjiksVZ la[;k 106@2026 vijk/k vUrxZr /kkjk 8] 22] 20] 29 Lokid vkS"kf/k ,oa eu% izHkkoh inkFkZ vf/kfu;e] 1985 esa is'k fd;k x;k gSA izkFkhZ@vfHk;qDr ds fo}ku vfHkHkk"kd dk cgl ds nkSjku rdZ jgk gS fd izkFkhZ@vfHk;qDr fnukad 03-05-2026 ls vfHkj{kk esa py jgk gS rFkk og uo;qod gSA izkFkhZ@vfHk;qDr ds dCts ls eknd inkFkZ cjken ugha gqvk gS] oju lgvfHk;qDr esgqy vjksM+k ds dCts ls eknd inkFkZ cjken gqvk gSA izkFkhZ@vfHk;qDr ds fo#) tks vU; izFke lwpuk fjiksVZ la[;k 211@2026 iqfyl Fkkuk egs'k uxj] ftyk t;iqj flVh ¼nf{k.k½ crkbZ xbZ gS] mlesa mlds dCts ls okf.kfT;d ek=k ls de ek=k dk 94 xzke xkatk cjken gqvk

(2 of 5) [CRLMB-8227/2026] gS] blds vfrfjDr izkFkhZ@vfHk;qDr ds fo#) dksbZ vU; vkjksfir vijk/k ugha gSA izkFkhZ@vfHk;qDr ij ;g vkjksi gS fd mlus lgvfHk;qDr ftlds dCts ls eknd inkFkZ feyk gS] ml lgvfHk;qDr esgqy vjksM+k dks okf.kfT;d ek=k ls vf/kd ek=k ds eknd inkFkZ dh vkiwfrZ dh gSA izdj.k esa vkjksi i= izLrqr gksuk 'ks"k gSA izdj.k ds fopkj.k esa le; yxsxkA vr% izkFkhZ@vfHk;qDr dk tekur izkFkZuk i= Lohdkj fd;k tkdj mls tekur ij fjgk fd;k tkosA fo}ku yksd vfHk;kstd dk cgl ds nkSjku rdZ jgk gS fd izkFkhZ@vfHk;qDr us lgvfHk;qDr esgqy vjksM+k dks okf.kfT;d ek=k ls vf/kd ek=k ds eknd inkFkZ dh vkiwfrZ dh gSA izkFkhZ@vfHk;qDr ds fo#) eknd inkFkZ ls lacaf/kr ,d vU; izdj.k fopkjk/khu gSA vr% izkFkhZ@vfHk;qDr ds fo#) yafcr vkijkf/kd izdj.k dks n`f"Vxr j[krs gq, rFkk izkFkhZ@vfHk;qDr ds fo#) vkjksfir vijk/k dh xaHkhjrk dks n`f"Vxr j[krs gq, ;g tekur izkFkZuk i= [kkfjt fd;k tkosA eSaus mHk; i{kksa dh vksj ls izLrqr rdksZa ij euu fd;k rFkk i=koyh dk voyksdu fd;kA orZeku izdj.k esa izkFkhZ@vfHk;qDr ij ;g vkjksi gS fd mlus lgvfHk;qDr esgqy vjksMk dks voS/k eknd inkFkZ ,y-,l-Mh- CykWV 0-25 xzke dqy ux 24] ,e-Mh-,e-,-] fiYl ¼xksfy;ka½ dqy ux 18 otu 7 xzke 15 feyhxzke ,oa 16 xzke 50 feyhxzke vkWxsZfud ¼gkbZMªks½ xkatk dh vkiwfrZ dhA vuqla/kku ds nkSjku ;g rF; lkeus vk;k gS fd izkFkhZ@vfHk;qDr }kjk ?kVuk vkSj ?kVuk ls iwoZ voS/k eknd inkFkksZa dh vkiwfrZ djus] iSlksa dk ysu&nsu djus] ckrphr djus o pSV] dkWy ykWx vkfn djus ds rF; lkeus vk, gSa] ftuds Ldzhu'kkWV fy, tkdj i=koyh esa j[ks x, gSaA izkFkhZ@vfHk;qDr ds fo#) eknd inkFkZ ls lacaf/kr ,d vU; vijk/k dk vkjksi izFke lwpuk fjiksVZ la[;k 211@2026 iqfyl Fkkuk egs'k uxj] ftyk t;iqj flVh ¼nf{k.k½ esa ntZ gS] mlesa mlds dCts ls 94 xzke xkatk cjken gqvk gSA ,slh

(3 of 5) [CRLMB-8227/2026] fLFkfr esa ;g Li"V gS fd izkFkhZ@vfHk;qDr ds fo#) eknd inkFkksZa ls lacaf/kr vU; vijk/k dk vkjksi Hkh gSA bl izdj.k esa izkFkhZ@vfHk;qDr ij okf.kfT;d ek=k ls vf/kd ek=k ds eknd inkFkkZa dh vkiwfrZ djus ds vijk/k dk vkjksi gSA izkFkhZ@vfHk;qDr ds fo#) vU; vkijkf/kd izdj.k dks n`f"Vxr j[krs gq, bl izdj.k esa /kkjk 37 ,u-Mh-ih-,l- vf/kfu;e ds izko/kku ykxw gksrs gSaA eknd inkFkksZa ds izdj.k esa vR;ar o`f) gks jgh gS] ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; us bls xaHkhjrk ls fy;k gSA bl laca/k esa ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; ds }kjk ikfjr fofu'p; ^^Union of India Vs. Ajay Kumar Singh Alias Pappu; 2023 SCC OnLine SC 346" ds lqlaxr Hkkx dks ;gka m)fjr fd;k tkuk U;k;ksfpr gksxk%& "14. This apart, it is noticed that the High Court, in passing the impugned order of bail, had lost sight of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, which, inter alia, provides that no person accused of an ofence involving commercial quantity shall be released on bail unless the twin conditions laid down therein are satisfed, namely, (i) the public prosecutor has been given an opportunity to oppose the bail application; and (ii) the court is satisfed that there are reasonable grounds for believing that he is not guilty of such an ofence and that he is not likely to commit any such ofence while on bail.

15. For the sake of convenience Section 37(1) is reproduced hereinbelow:— “37. Ofences to be cognizable and nonbailable.-

(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (2 of 1974)- (a) every ofence punishable under this Act shall be cognizable; (b) no person accused of an ofence punishable for 2[ofences under section 19 or section 24 or section 27A and also for ofences involving commercial quantity] shall be released on bail or on his own bond unless-

(i) the Public Prosecutor has been given an opportunity to oppose the application for such release, and

(ii) where the Public Prosecutor opposes the application, the court is satisfed that there are reasonable grounds for believing that he is not guilty of such ofence and that he is not likely to commit any ofence while on bail.”

16. In view of the above provisions, it is implicit that no person accused of an ofence involving trade in commercial quantity of narcotics is liable to be released on bail unless the court is satisfed that there are reasonable grounds for believing that he is not guilty of such an ofence and that he is not likely to commit any ofence while on bail."

(4 of 5) [CRLMB-8227/2026] blh izdkj ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; ds }kjk ikfjr fofu'p; ^^State of Punjab Versus Balraj Singh @ Billa; 2023 INSC 618" ds iSjk la[;k 14] 15] 16] 17 dks Hkh ;gka m)fjr fd;k tkuk U;k;ksfpr gksxk%&

14. As rightly submitted by the appellant State, this Court, in Lalrintluanga Sailo (Supra) while setting aside the bail granted by the High Court therein had held that consideration on the twin conditions under Section 37 of the NDPS Act is essential by the concerned Court. It was observed:

10. Thus, the provisions under Section 37(1)(b)(ii) of the NDPS Act and the decisions referred supra revealing the consistent view of this Court that while considering the application for bail made by an accused involved in an ofence under the NDPS Act a liberal approach ignoring the mandate under Section 37 of the NDPS Act is impermissible. Recording a fnding mandated under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, which is sine qua non for granting bail to an accused under the NDPS Act cannot be avoided while passing orders on such applications.”

15. To the similar efect, this Court in State by the Inspector of Police v. B. Ramu reiterated that satisfaction with the conditions laid down under Section 37 of the NDPS Act is mandatory while entertaining a prayer for bail involving commercial quantity of narcotic drugs. [See also: Ajay Kumar Singh alias Pappu (Supra)]

16. In similar circumstances, this Court in Union of India v. Namdeo Ashruba Nakade observed that the mandatory nature of Section 37 cannot be dispensed with: “12. Prima facie this Court is of the opinion that the Respondent-accused is involved in drug trafcking in an organized manner. Consequently, no case for dispensing with mandatory requirement of Section 37 of the NDPS Act is made out in the present matter.

13. Moreover, this Court is of the view that as the accused has been charged with ofences punishable with ten to twenty years rigorous imprisonment, it cannot be said that the Respondent has been incarcerated for an unreasonably long time.”

17. Keeping in view the above expositions of law, we now proceed to examine the impugned order. The abovementioned decisions of this Court display the consistent view that when it comes to cases involving commercial quantity of narcotics, the mandatory requirements of Section 37 ought to be considered. It is not in dispute that the case at hand, involves commercial quantity. In such a scenario, consideration and reference to the twin conditions enumerated under Section 37 of the NDPS Act was mandatory. Upon a bare perusal of the impugned order, it is evident

(5 of 5) [CRLMB-8227/2026] that there has been no consideration at all by the High Court on the twin conditions. In such a scenario, the impugned order cannot be sustained in the eyes of law. vr% izdj.k ds rF;ksa] ifjfLFkfr;ksa rFkk izkFkhZ@vfHk;qDr ds fo:) vkjksfir vijk/k dh xaHkhjrk dks n`f"Vxr j[krs gq, izdj.k ds xq.k&nks"kksa ij fVIi.kh fd;s fcuk bl izØe ij izkFkhZ@vfHk;qDr dks tekur dk ykHk fn;k tkuk mfpr izrhr ugha gksrk gSA ifj.kker% izkFkhZ@vfHk;qDr ;'k cMsfr;k iq= Jh vt; dqekj cMsfr;k dh vksj ls izLrqr ;g tekur izkFkZuk i= vLohdkj dj [kkfjt fd;k tkrk gSA (CHANDRA PRAKASH SHRIMALI),J 43/KISHAN SONI