Rajasthan High Court
CRLMB/3160/2026 of SHIVSHANKAR S/O LADDU LAL Vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN on 15 April 2026
JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 3160/2026 Shivshankar S/o Laddu Lal, Aged About 49 Years, R/o Ward No. 12 Khatoli Gate, Uniara Police Station, Uniara, District Tonk (Rajasthan) (Presently Accused Petitioner In Confined At Centar Jail
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 3160/2026
Shivshankar S/o Laddu Lal, Aged About 49 Years, R/o Ward No.
12 Khatoli Gate, Uniara Police Station, Uniara, District Tonk (Rajasthan) (Presently Accused Petitioner In Confined At Centar Jail Tonk)
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan, through PP
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s)
:
Mr. Anmol Dhakar
For Respondent(s)
:
Ms. Aarti Sharma, 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
15/04/2026
1. This bail application has been filed by the accused petitioner u/S 483 BNSS in connection with FIR No. 129/2024 registered at Police Station Uniara, District Tonk for offence u/S 8/20 of the NDPS Act.
2. Learned counsel for the accused petitioner submits that the accused petitioner is an innocent person and has falsely implicated in the matter. He further submits that the police is showing false recovery of the contraband ganja, whereas the contraband recovered was not ganja but the same was bhang and the petitioner himself is the bhang contractor and having valid license in his name. He further submits that contraband (leaves) do not fall within the definition of ganja because it consists plants. The leaves and stalks of cannabis plant are expressly excluded from
(2 of 3) [CRLMB-3160/2026] the definition of ganja. Counsel 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 commercial and small quantity of cannabis plant. Therefore, the bail application of the accused petitioner may be allowed.
3. Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the bail application.
4. Heard and considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the Public Prosecutor.
5. The leaves of cannabis plant containing 23.800 kg. are shown to be recovered from the accused petitioner and as per the provisions of Section 2(iii)(b) of the NDPS Act, flowering of fruiting tops of cannabis plant falls within the ambit of ganja. The seeds and leaves without tops are not termed as ganja. Therefore, without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, deems just and proper to enlarge the accused-petitioner on bail.
6. Accordingly, this bail application is allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner shall be released on bail provided that he furnishes 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) to the satisfaction of the Trial Court with the stipulation that he shall appear before that Court or any Court to which the matter is transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.
(3 of 3) [CRLMB-3160/2026]
7. In case the accused-petitioner is found to be involved in any other criminal case of similar nature in future, the prosecution may move application for cancellation of his bail. (GANESH RAM MEENA),J Gaurav Srivastava /58