Supreme Court of India
AJAY TRAPATHI VS. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH on 27 October 2026
ITEM NO.13 COURT NO.5 SECTION II-E
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 19637/2026
[Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 03-09-2026 in MCRC No. 34560/2026 passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh Principal Seat at Jabalpur]
AJAY TRAPATHI Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Respondent(s)
FOR ADMISSION
IA No. 315238/2026 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.
Date : 27-10-2026 This matter was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.B. PARDIWALA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. VINOD CHANDRAN
For Petitioner(s) :Mr. Ayush Anand- 3409, AOR
Mr. Vishal Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Somya Kumari, Adv.
Mr. Krishan Kant Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Monu Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Chander, Adv.
Digitally signed by
CHANDRESH
Date: 2026.10.28
16:58:50 IST
Reason:
Signature Not Verified
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rajan Kumar Chourasia, Adv.
Mr. Abhijeet Pandove, Adv.
Ms. Mrinal Gopal Elker, AOr
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
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.
O R D E R
1. The Petitioner herein has been apprehended in connection with FIR No. 122/2021 for offences under Sections 20(b)
(ii) (c) & 8 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, “the NDPS Act”). The FIR was registered pursuant to 219.55 Kg of Ganja being found in an abandoned car bearing Registration No. CG-05-5214. Upon investigation, it was found that the car in question was rented out in the name of co-accused Lukesh who further disclosed the name of the Petitioner on whose behalf he claimed to have carried the Ganja.
2. It has been argued by the counsel for the Petitioner that there are several inconsistencies in the procedure adopted by the Investigating authorities, the most glaring of which has been made out during the course of trial regarding the admission of 2 of the independent witnesses PW1 & PW2 having signed blank sheets of paper during the recovery and sampling process.
3. Upon a perusal of the material on record, we are inclined to grant bail, as the Petitioner has been languishing in jail for over a year with his nexus to the crime solely dependant upon the disclosure of the co-accused. Further, the trial proceedings seems unlikely to be concluded soon.
4. In view of the reasons mentioned hereinabove, we order that the Petitioner be released on bail subject to such terms and conditions that the Jurisdictional Trial Court may deem fit to impose.
5. With the above directions, the Special Leave Petition is disposed of.
6. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. (CHANDRESH) (POOJA SHARMA) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS COURT MASTER (NSH)