Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2026:RJ-JP:16569] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 5186/2026 Virendra S/o Shri Dharampal, R/o Alwar Road, Near N H 08 Behror, Tehsil Behror, District Presently Kotputali-Behror (Raj.). ----Petitioner Versus State of Rajasthan, through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Gopal Gupta For Respondent(s) : Ms. Arti Sharma, Public Prosecutor HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA
Order 17/04/2026
1. This anticipatory bail application has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 on behalf of accused-petitioner in connection with FIR No.10/2026 registered at Police Station Bahror, District Kotputli-Behror for the offence under Section 8/20 of the N.D.P.S. Act.
2.
Learned counsel for the accused-petitioner submits that the accused-petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that the accused-petitioner has been made an accused showing him to be a tenant of a room from where the alleged contraband i.e. Ganja weighing about 37.912 Kg is said to have been recovered.
3.
Learned counsel further submits that the accused-petitioner has never visited to this place and has never taken the alleged premises on rent. He also submits that the accused-petitioner is ready to cooperate with the investigation.
[2026:RJ-JP:16569] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-5186/2026]
4. Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the bail application and submits that the statements of the owner of the premises has been recorded who in his statement had deposed that the room from where the alleged contraband has been recovered was given on rent to the present accused-petitioner for an amount of Rs.2700/- per month.
5. Taking into consideration the fact that there is recovery of Ganja weighing about 37.912 Kg from a room which is said to be given on rent to the accused-petitioner, this Court prima-facie finds that the accused-petitioner is connected with the alleged contraband recovered. Hence, the Court is not inclined to extent the benefit of anticipatory bail to the present accused-petitioner.
6. Accordingly, this anticipatory bail application is dismissed.
(GANESH RAM MEENA),J Ashish Kumar /84