Rajasthan High Court
CRLMB/5676/2026 of BANNU @ BANIRAJ S/O KALURAM Vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN on 18 April 2026
JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 5676/2026 Bannu @ Baniraj S/o Kaluram, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Sakarpuriya Ki Dhani Tan Mandawari, Police Station Mandawari, District Dausa (Raj.) (At Present Accused Petitioner Is Confined In District
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No.
5676/2026
Bannu @ Baniraj S/o Kaluram, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Sakarpuriya Ki Dhani Tan Mandawari, Police Station Mandawari, District Dausa (Raj.) (At Present Accused Petitioner Is Confined In District Jail Dausa).
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P.
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s)
:
Mr. Amitabh Jatav
For Respondent(s)
:
Mr. Shree Ram Dhakad, P.P.
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
18/04/2026
1. The petitioner has filed the present bail application under Section 483 B.N.S.S.,2023, in connection with F.I.R. No.27/2026, registered with the Police Station Mandavri, District Dausa, for offence under Section 8 and 21 of N.D.P.S. Act.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the accused-petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case merely on the basis of statement of co-accused, Omkesh @ Balla Meena, from whose possession the alleged contraband, i.e., 6.32 gm Smack is said to have been recovered and he has stated that he has been supplied the alleged contraband by the present accused- petitioner. The learned counsel further submits that an accused cannot be convicted only on the basis of the statement of co- accused. He further submits that the petitioner is in custody since
(2 of 3) [CRLMB-5676/2026] 18.03.2026; he is no more required for any kind of recovery or interrogation and trial of the case is likely to take considerable time to conclude, therefore, he may be enlarged on bail.
3. The learned Public Prosecutor has opposed this bail application and submits that after the arrest of the petitioner, he himself has given an information under Section 23(2) of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, and verified the place on which he is said to have supplied the alleged contraband to co- accused, Omkesh @ Balla Meena. The learned Public Prosecutor also submits that apart from the present criminal case, as many as ten (10) other criminal cases are also registered against the present petitioner, out of which, four cases are of similar nature, i.e., for offence punishable under the NDPS Act.
4. Considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor and also perused the case diary.
5. As per the facts on record, the allegation against the present petitioner is that he is said to have supplied the alleged contraband, i.e., 6.32 gm Smack to co-accused, Omkesh @ Balla Meena, from whose possession the alleged contraband was recovered. Co-accused, Omkesh @ Balla Meena, in his statement under Section 67 of the NDPS Act, has also categorically stated that he has purchased the contraband from the present petitioner. On arrest of the present petitioner, he has verified the place on which he is said to have supplied the alleged contraband to co- accused.
(3 of 3) [CRLMB-5676/2026]
6. Apart from the evidence collected during investigation, which connects the present petitioner with the alleged offence, and the fact that the petitioner is facing ten other criminal cases, including four cases of similar nature, i.e., for the offence punishable under the NDPS Act, the investigation of the case is still going on, hence, this Court at this stage is not inclined to enlarge the accused-petitioner on bail.
7. Accordingly, the present bail application filed on behalf of the petitioner is dismissed. (GANESH RAM MEENA),J ARTI SHARMA /78