Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2026 DAILYLAW 3393 (RAJ)

PARVATSINGH URF KALLA S/O BABULAL v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CRLMB/6051/2026 · 2026-04-30

Pramil Kumar Mathur

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2026:RJ-JP:18416] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 6051/2026 1. Parvatsingh Urf Kalla S/o Babulal, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Khedisheesh, Police Station Sadar Hindaun, District Karauli. (At Present Accused Petitioner Confined In District Jail Karauli). 2. Ramavtar @ Kallu S/o Mangalram, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Khedisheesh, Police Station Sadar Hindaun, District Karauli, Rajasthan. (At Present Accused Petitioner Confined In District Jail Karauli). ----Petitioners Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Jiya UR Rahman For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vivek Sharma, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR Order 30/04/2026 1. The petitioners have preferred this bail application under Section 483 of BNSS in FIR No.157/2026 registered at Police Station Hindon Sadar, District Karauli for offences under Sections 8, 21 and 29 of NDPS Act, 1985. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Public Prosecutor and perused the material available on record. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that 5.35 grams of contraband (smack) has been recovered from the conscious possession of petitioner Parvatsingh @ Kalla, which is below the commercial quantity. No contraband [2026:RJ-JP:18416] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-6051/2026] has been recovered from the conscious possession of petitioner Ramavtar @ Kallu. The petitioners have been in custody since 05.04.2026. It is further submitted that one criminal antecedent has been reported against both petitioners respectively, registered under the RPGO. The trial of the case will take considerable time, therefore, no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioners in further custody, consequently, the bail application deserves to be allowed. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application. 5. On consideration of the rival submissions and material available on record and in light of submission made by learned counsel for the petitioners but without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of the case, I am inclined to grant benefit of bail to the petitioners. 6. Consequently, the bail application under Section 483 B.N.S.S. is allowed and it is directed that the petitioners Parvatsingh Urf Kalla S/o Babulal and Ramavtar @ Kallu S/o Mangalram, be released on bail provided each of them furnish a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court with the stipulation that they shall appear before that Court on all subsequent dates of hearing till conclusion of the trial. (PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR),J Arun/101