Rajasthan High Court
CRLMB/5728/2026 of MOHIT CHOUDHARY S/O SHRI RAMSAHAI CHOUDHARY Vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN on 16 April 2026
JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 5728/2026 Mohit Choudhary S/o Shri Ramsahai Choudhary, Aged About 27 Years, R/o House No. 21, Bharav Nagar A , Gas Godam Road, Police Station Karni Vihar, Jaipur. (At Present Confined In Central Jail
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 5728/2026
Mohit Choudhary S/o Shri Ramsahai Choudhary, Aged About 27
Years, R/o House No. 21, Bharav Nagar A, Gas Godam Road, Police Station Karni Vihar, Jaipur. (At Present Confined In Central Jail Jaipur).
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s)
:
Mr. Bharat Yadav
For Respondent(s)
:
Mr. Shree Ram Dhakar, PP
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
16/04/2026
1. This bail application has been filed by the accused petitioner u/S 483 BNSS in connection with FIR No. 140/2026 registered at Police Station Karni Vihar, District Jaipur (West) for offence punishable u/S 8/22 of NDPS Act.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the Public Prosecutor.
3. The allegation against the accused-petitioner is that the contraband that is MDA 3.37 gram is said to have been recovered from his possession, which is less than commercial quantity. He further submits that the present case has been registered against the present petition merely on suspicion and there is no verification made by the police before registering of the case whether the material which has been recovered from his
(2 of 3) [CRLMB-5728/2026] possession is in actual as MDA or not. He further submits that the accused petitioner is in custody since 26.03.2026 and no any other criminal case of similar nature pending against him. It is also submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that while making the seizure, no independent witness was erred by the seizure officer.
4. Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the bail application and submits that the investigation of the police is still going on and the accused petitioner is also facing three other criminal cases.
5. Considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor.
6. As per the contents of the first information report, on suspicion when the accused-petitioner was searched a material being 3.37 gram, alleged to be MDA, was recovered from his possession. Apart from this, the alleged material which is said to be MDA, 12 glass tubes were also recovered from the possession of the petitioner which are being used for consumption of the MDA.
7. In the matters of offences punishable under the NDPS Act, there is a provision that if the persons who are involved in the production, distribution and transportation of the Narcotic Drugs and whenever any contraband is recovered from the possession of any person then the Investigating Agency has to make a thorough investigation as regard the connection of the person from whose possession the contraband has been recovered, so as to complete the chain of the production, distribution and transportation.
(3 of 3) [CRLMB-5728/2026]
8. The issue of contravention of the Section 50 of the NDPS Act cannot be appreciated at the stage of investigation. If during investigation, a person from whose possession contraband has been recovered and is also facing other criminal cases, is released on bail, there may be certain chances of interfering investigation or destroying the evidence of searching the connecting chain of production, distribution and transportation.
9. Learned counsel for the petitioner also made a submission that there is no compliance of Section 50 of the NDPS Act.
10. In the present case, the accused-petitioner has been arrested on 26.03.2026 and investigation of the case is still going on.
11. Taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances of this case, this Court at this stage is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.
12. Accordingly, the bail application is dismissed.
13. However, petitioner would be at liberty to file fresh bail application after completion of the investigation. (GANESH RAM MEENA),J NEERU/32