Rajasthan High Court
CRLMB/3835/2026 of VIKRAM MEENA S/O SHRI REVDAYA MEENA Vs THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN on 15 April 2026
JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 3835/2026 Vikram Meena S/o Shri Revdaya Meena, Aged About 43 Years, R/o Gerota, Police Station Mehandipur Balaji, Distt. Dausa (Raj.) (Petitioner Is District Jail Alwar). ----Petitioner Versus The State Of
[2026:RJ-JP:15660]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No.
3835/2026
Vikram Meena S/o Shri Revdaya Meena, Aged About 43 Years, R/o Gerota, Police Station Mehandipur Balaji, Distt. Dausa (Raj.)
(Petitioner Is District Jail Alwar).
----Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s)
:
Ms. Shazadi Bano
For Respondent(s)
:
Mr. Shreeram 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
15/04/2026
1. This bail application has been filed by the accused petitioner under Section 483 BNSS in connection with FIR No.167/2025 registered at Police Station N.E.B., Alwar, for offence under Sections 8, 20 and 25 of the NDPS Act.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present accused petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. She further submit that the allegation against the present petitioner is of providing the contraband to accused persons namely; Mohan Singh @ Hathi and Preetam, from whose possession the alleged contraband was recovered. She also submits that the petitioner is behind the bars since 25.10.2025 and trial of the case is likely to take considerable time to conclude, therefore, the accused-petitioner may be released on bail.
3. Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application and submits that there are allegation against the
[2026:RJ-JP:15660] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-3835/2026] present petitioner, therefore, he does not deserve indulgence of bail by this Court.
4. Considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor.
5. In criminal jurisprudence, the statement of an accused solely cannot be made the basis for conviction of other accused persons.
6. Taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances of the case and so also the fact that the petitioner is behind the bars since 25.10.2025, this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits and demerits of the case, deems just and proper to enlarge the accused-petitioner on bail.
7. 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.
8. 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 ARTI SHARMA /67