Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2026 DAILYLAW 1143 (RAJ)

SURESH BHARTI S/O SHIV BHARTI v. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CRLMB/4192/2026 · 2026-04-07

Ganesh Ram Meena

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2026:RJ-JP:14240] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2nd Bail Application No. 4192/2026 Suresh Bharti S/o Shiv Bharti, R/o Behind Peer Baba Ki Mazar Wali Street, Subhash Nagar, Ajmer, P.s. Ramganj, Distt. Ajmer, Rajasthan. (Presently In Judicial Custody At Sub Jail Sangod, Distt. Kota, Rajasthan). ----Petitioner Versus The State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shiv Charan Gupta, Mr. Harsh Saraswat For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sriram Dhaka, P.P. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA Order 07/04/2026 1. This second bail application has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 on behalf of accused-petitioner in connection with FIR No. 0037/2023 registered at Police Station Modak, District Kota Rural for offence under Sections 8, 20 of the N.D.P.S. Act 1985. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the accused-petitioner is in custody since 07.02.2023 and even after passing or more than three years not even a single prosecution witness has been examined so far. The allegation against the accused-petitioner is that he was found in possession of 291.7 kg. Ganja more than the commercial quantity. [2026:RJ-JP:14240] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-4192/2026] 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that it is the fundamental right of the accused-petitioner of having speedy trial as enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and no one can be detained for an indefinite period without there being any specific progress in the trial. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application, however, he is not in a position to give any satisfactory explanation for non-appearance of the prosecution witnesses for their examination before the learned Trial Court. 5. This Court vide order dated 23.03.2026 called for status report from the learned Trial Court as regards the trial. The Trial Court vide letter dated 01.04.2026 has sent a status report as regards trial. In the status report learned Trial Court has mentioned as under:- "Jheku th mDr izdj.k esa fnukad 18-07-2024 ls xokgku ryc fd;s tk jgs gSaA fnukad 07-08-2024 dks vfHk;qDrx.k f”kojkt egkohj mQZ f”kok ds fo:) /kkjk 8@29 ,oa vfHk;qDr lqxukjke ds fo:) /kkjk 8@20 ,uMhih,l ,DV ds vkjksi esa frrEck pkyku is”k fd;k ftl ij vfHk;qDrx.k ds fo:) mDr vijk/k dk izlaKku fy;k tkdj i=koyh cgl vkjksi gsrq fu;r dh xbZA fnukad 13-11-2024 dks vfHk;qDr f”kojkt ij /kkjk 8@29 ,uMhih,l ,DV dk vkjksi fojfpr fd;k x;k ,oa fnukad 13-01-2025 dks vfHk;qDr lqxukjke dks /kkjk 8@20 ,uMhih,l ,DV dk vkjksi fojfpr fd;k tkdj xokgku dks ryc fd;k x;kA fnukad 08-02-2025] 15-03-2025] 08-04-2025 dks xokgku dks fxjQ~rkjh okj.V ls ryc fd;k x;k gSA rkehy Hkh fyfid }kjk tkjh dh tk jgh gSA fnukad 22-04-2025] 08-05-2025] 30- 05-2025] 16-06-2025] 30-06-2025] 19-07-2025] 16-08-2025] 23-09-2025] 15-10-2025 dks Hkh xokgku dks tfj;s tekurh okj.V ryc fd;k x;k gSA fnukad 11-11-2025 vfHk;qDr ccyh ds fo:) vijk/k /kkjk 8@25 o [2026:RJ-JP:14240] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-4192/2026] vfHk;qDr Hkjr dqekj iqjksfgr ds fo:) vijk/k /kkjk 8@29 ,uMhih,l ,DV esa frrEck pkyku izLrqr fd;s tkus ij muds fo:) mDr vijk/k dk izlaKku fy;k x;k rFkk fnukad 03-01-2026 dks mijksDr nksuksa vfHk;qDrx.k dks vkjksi fojfpr fd;k tkdj lquk;k x;k ,oa xokgku dks tekurh okj.V ls ryc fd;k x;k gSA fnukad 16-01-2026] 31-01-2026] 13-02-2026] 25-02-2026] 12-03-2026 dks v)Z”kkldh; i= xokgku dh ryoh gsrq iqfyl v/kh{kd dksVk xzkeh.k dks tkjh fd;k x;k ftlds i”pkr Hkh xokgku mifLFkr ugha vkus ij fnukad 12-03-2026 dks ,l-,p-vks- jkexateaMh ls Li’Vhdj.k ryc fd;k x;k o iqu% v)Z”kkldh; i= tkjh fd;s tkus ds vkns”k fn;s x;sA vkxkeh is”kh fnukad 27-03-2026 dks iqu% ,l-ih-dksVk xzkeh.k dks xokgku dh rkehy djok;s tkus gsrq v)Z”kkldh; i= tkjh fd;k x;kA vfHk;kstu o iqfyl }kjk xokg is”k ugha fd;s tkus ls lk{; ys[kc) ugha gks ldh gSA izdj.k esa xokgu dh rkehy ,l-ih- dksVk xzkeh.k dks v)Z”kkldh; i= ds tfj;s tkjh dh tk jgh gSA fyfid }kjk Hkh yxkrkj rkehy tkjh dh tk jgh gSA xokgku ls rkehy ds Hkjld iz;kl fd;s tk jgs gSaA vr% rkehy tkjh dh tkdj “kh?kz gh xokgku dh lk{; ys[kc) dh tk;sxhA" 6. On perusal of the status report sent by the learned Trial Court it is revealed that the prosecution witnesses are not turning up for their examination and the Trial Court has also called explanation from the Superintendent of Police Kota Rural and so also SHO Ramganj Mandi but even then also no witness has been turned up so far for the examination. The petitioner is in custody for the last more than three years and without there being any specific progress in the trial, the Trial Court feels that it would be proper to continue the detention of the petitioner. 7. Taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances of the case and more particularly the fact that accused-petitioner is in custody since last more than three years [2026:RJ-JP:14240] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-4192/2026] and till date not a single one prosecution witness has been examined, 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. 8. Accordingly, the present bail application is allowed and it is directed that the accused-petitioner shall be released on bail provided that he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lax Only) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) each to the satisfaction of the learned 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. 9. However, it is made clear that in case the accused- petitioner is found to be involved in any other criminal case of similar nature in future, the prosecution would be at liberty to move an application for cancellation of this bail order. (GANESH RAM MEENA),J SHRUTI SHARMA /10