Rajasthan High Court
CRLMB/9245/2026 of YOGESH S/O DALVEER Vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN on 21 July 2026
JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Second Bail Application No. 9245/2026 URN: CRLMB / 16967U / 2026 Yogesh S/o Dalveer, R/o Village Shayorawali, Police Station, Januthar, District Deeg (Raj.) (At Present Confined In District Jail, Bharatpur) ----Petitioner
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Second Bail Application No.
URN: CRLMB / 16967U / 2026
Yogesh S/o Dalveer, R/o Village Shayorawali, Police Station, Januthar, District Deeg (Raj.) (At Present Confined In District Jail, Bharatpur)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
----Respondent
Connected With
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Second Bail Application No.
URN: CRLMB / 16968U / 2026
1. Sumit S/o Yogendra, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Shyoravli, Police Station Janoothar, District Deeg (Raj.) (At Present Confined In District Jail, Bharatpur).
2. Rahul S/o Pappu @ Nawal, Aged About 19 Years, R/o Shyoravli, Police Station Janoothar, District Deeg (Raj.) (At Present Confined In District Jail, Bharatpur).
----Petitioners
Versus
State of Rajasthan, through PP
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s)
:
Mr. Rajveer Singh Gurjar
For Respondent(s)
:
Ms. Aarti Sharma, P.P.
(2 of 3)
[CRLMB-9245/2026]
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
Order
21/07/2026
1. The Petitioners have filed these second bail applications under Section 483 B.N.S.S., arising out of F.I.R. No.189/2024 registered with the Police Station Janoothar, District Deeg for offence under Section 8/20 of the N.D.P.S. Act, 1985.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the accused-petitioners have been falsely implicated in the case merely on the basis of statements of the co-accused. He further submits that the material which is said to have been recovered from the co-accused does not fall in the definition of Ganja. The leaves and stalks of cannabis plant are expressly excluded from the definition of ganja. He further submits that as per the Central Government Notification S.O. 527 dated 16.07.1996 specifying small quantity and commercial quantity of Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances, it does not prescribe "Small Quantity" and "Commercial Quantity" of the cannabis plant. He further submits that accused-petitioners Rahul and Sumit are in custody since 13.12.2025 and accused-petitioner Yogesh is in custody since 24.02.2026. He also submits that the Police after completion of the investigation has submitted charge- sheet in the matter. Therefore, the accused-petitioners may be enlarged on bail.
3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application and submits that the contraband involved in this case is above commercial quantity.
(3 of 3) [CRLMB-9245/2026]
4. The leaves of cannabis plant (ganja) containing 31.120 Kg. are shown to be recovered from possession of the co-accused and as per the provisions of Section 2(iii)(b) of the NDPS Act, flowering or fruiting tops of cannabis plant falls within the ambit of ganja. The seeds and leaves without tops are not termed as ganja. Thus, the Court without commenting anything on the merits or demerits of the case, deems just and proper to enlarge the accused-petitioner on bail.
5. As per the facts on record, no contraband is said to have been recovered from the possession of the accused- petitioners and they have been arrayed as an accused only on the basis of the statements of the co-accused.
6. Accordingly, these second bail applications are allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioners shall be released on bail provided they furnish a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac only) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) each to the satisfaction of the trial Court with the stipulation that they shall appear before that Court and any Court to which the matter be transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.
7. In case the accused-petitioners are found to be involved in any other criminal case of similar nature in future, the prosecution may move application for cancellation of their bail. (GANESH RAM MEENA),J 2-3/SHRUTI SHARMA