[2026:RJ-JP:30169] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Second Bail Application No. 7707/2026 CNR: RJHC020460692026 | URN: CRLMB / 14042U / 2026 Harshit S/o Dhannalal, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Devnagar, Jhalarapatan, Tehsil Bakani, Police Station Bakaani, Distt. Jha- lawar. (Petitioner Is In Sub Jail Beawar). ----Petitioner Versus The State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Second Bail Application No. 7708/2026 CNR: RJHC020460722026 | URN: CRLMB / 14043U / 2026 Radheshyam @ Radhe S/o Babulal, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Kanchnariya Railway Station Ke Pass, Police Station Aklera, Dist. Jhalawar. (Petitioner Is In Sub Jail Beawar). ----Petitioner Versus The State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Chhavi Chaturvedi, ( 7707/2026), Ms. Drishti Mishra (7708/2026) For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rishi Raj Singh Rathore, P.P. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA Order 04/08/2026 1. These second bail applications have been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 on behalf of accused-petitioners in connection with FIR No. 228/2025 [2026:RJ-JP:30169] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-7707/2026] registered at Police Station Beawar Sadar, District Beawar for offence under Sections 8 and 15 of the N.D.P.S. Act 1985. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the accused-petitioner 'Harshit' submits that no contraband is said to have been recovered from his possession. She also submits that there is no evidence to connect the accused-petitioner with the other co- accused. She further submits that the petitioner has been impli- cated as an accused only on the basis of the statements of the co- accused namely; Sandeep, Kailashchand and Rahul from whose possession Doda Chura weighing 92 kg. 760 gram was recovered.. It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner Harshit that in case of Tofan Singh Vs. State of T.N. (2021) 4 SCC 175 the Hon'ble Apex Court observed that the statements of the co-accused recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS Act cannot be treated to be a confession. She also submits that the accused- petitioner is in custody since 01.01.2026 and police after completion of the investigation, has already submitted charge- sheet. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the accused-petitioner 'Radheshyam @ Radhe' submits that the accused-petitioner has been implicated in this case with the aid of 8/25 of the NDPS Act. She submits that no recovery of any contraband has been made from the accused-petitioner and he is in custody since 26.12.2025. Learned counsel also relied upon the order dated 08.05.2026 passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Criminal Appeal No......................./2026(S.L.P. (Criminal) No. 5187/2026 (Lokesh Poonia Vs. State of Rajasthan). [2026:RJ-JP:30169] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-7707/2026] 4. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the second bail applications and submits that the contraband involved in the present case is more than the commercial quantity and therefore in view of the provisions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, accused- petitioners do not deserve to be released on bail as there is suffi- cient evidence collected during investigation so as to connect them with the alleged crime. 5. Considered the submissions made by the counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Public Prosecutor and also perused the challan papers. 6. As per the facts on record, on interception of a vehicle alleged contraband i.e. 92.760 kg. Doda Chura was recovered and there were three persons in the vehicle namely; Sandeep, Kailashchand and Rahul. 7. The aforesaid co-accused in their statements during investigation has revealed that they were going to provide the alleged contraband to the accused-Radheshyam @ Radhe after purchasing the same from the other co-accused 'Harshit', who is the cultivator and there is licence in the name of his father. As per the charge-sheet, there is no evidence of any call conversation of the accused Harshit with the other co-accused. 8. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that there are call details as regards the conversation of the co-accused Radheshyam @ Radhe with the other co-accused. 9. Merely the call details cannot be the only basis for conviction of an accused until and unless there is sufficient evidence that the call conversation was in regard to the transaction of the alleged contraband. [2026:RJ-JP:30169] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-7707/2026] 10. Taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the Court feels just and proper to record its satisfaction as required under Section 37 of the NDPS Act. Hence, this Court without expressing any opinion on the merits or demerits of the case, deems just and proper to enlarge the accused- petitioners on bail. 11. Accordingly, the these second bail applications are allowed and it is directed that the accused-petitioners shall be released on bail provided that they furnish a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lax Only) (each) 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 they 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. 12. A copy of this order be placed in connected bail application. (GANESH RAM MEENA),J 1,2/SHRUTI SHARMA