[2026:RJ-JP:686] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 10427/2025 Rajat Ravikiran Toraskar S/o Shri Ravikiran Chintamani Toraskar, Aged About 22 Years, R/o Revtale, Malvan, Vtc Malvan Po - Malvan, Sub District Malvan, District Sindhudurg, Maharashtra- 416606. ----Petitioner Versus Narcotics Control Bureau, Mha, Government Of India, Jaipur Zonal Unit, Kendriya Sadan, B Block, 3Rd Floor, Vidhyadhar Nagar, Jaipur, Rajasthan - 302039. Through Special Pp. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rahul Agrawal Mr. Piyush Joshniwal through VC For Respondent(s) : Mr. Tej Prakash Sharma, SPP for NCB with Mr. Vaibhav Jhankra HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR Order 08/01/2026 1. The petitioner has preferred this bail application under Section 482 of BNSS in FIR No.VIII(IO)05/NCB/JPZU/2025 registered at Narcotics Control Bureau, Jaipur Zonal Unit District Jaipur for the offence under Sections 8©, 22, 23 and 29 of the NDPS Act, 1985. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor and counsel for the complainant and perused the material available on record. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this is a case of mistaken identity of the petitioner. The present petitioner has been implicated on the basis of statements of co-accused which is impermissible in law. He further argued that the petitioner is a resident of Maharashtra without any criminal past, therefore, there [2026:RJ-JP:686] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-10427/2025] is no need of custodial interrogation of the petitioner, hence the bail application may be allowed. 4. On the contrary, learned Public Public Prosecutor and counsel for the complainant have submitted that the matter involves the contraband having commercial quantity of MDMA for which the petitioner has been served with the notice under Section 67 of the NDPS Act. Section 37 of the NDPS Act creates a statutory bar against grant of bail, therefore, looking to the gravity and seriousness of the offence as well as contraband having the commercial quantity, the petitioner is not entitled for anticipatory bail. 5. It is settled law that anticipatory bail can be granted only in exceptional circumstances where the Court is prima faice of the view that the petitioner has falsely been involved in the crime and would not misuse his/her liberty. In the offence involving commercial quantity the satisfaction of the court under Section 37 of the NDPS Act is mandatory. At this stage such satisfaction cannot be recorded in favour of the petitioner. 6. Thus, on consideration of the rival submission and material available on record and in light of submissions made by learned Public Prosecutor, but without expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits of the case, I am not inclined to grant extraordinary protection of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 7. Accordingly, the bail application under Section 482 B.N.S.S. is hereby rejected. (PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR),J bmg/333