[2026:RJ-JP:15826] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 2919/2026 Tarachand Rawat S/o Madan Singh, Aged About 39 Years, R/o Village Nedaliya Budha Pushkar, Police Station Pushkar, District Ajmer. (At Present Confined In Central Jail, Jaipur). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Aniket Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shree Ram Dhakar, P.P. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA Order 16/04/2026 1. The instant 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. 77/2026 registered at Police Station Pratap Nagar (Jaipur City East), District Jaipur City (East)for offence under Sections 8, 22, 25 of the N.D.P.S. Act 1985 and under Section 111(4) of the B.N.S. 2023 against the order dated 11.02.2026 whereby learned Trial Court dismissed the bail application filed by the accused-petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 8/22, 25 and 29 of the NDPS Act and under Section 111(4) of the B.N.S. 2023. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the accused-petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. He further submits that the petitioner has been arrayed as an accused [2026:RJ-JP:15826] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-2919/2026] on the basis of the statement of co-accused, Dilip Kumar, from whose possession the alleged contraband i.e. 77 gram MD is said to have been recovered. It is further submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that the allegation against the accused-petitioner is that co-accused namely; Dilip Kumar after having the contraband from Akachi (Ntatom Philipi @ Kaka), was delivering the contraband to the accused-petitioner. However, no such evidence has been collected during the course of the investigation. Counsel further submits that accused-petitioner is in custody since the date of his arrest and he is not required for any kind of interrogation and recovery, therefore, he may be released on bail. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application and submits that co-accused, Dilip Kumar, from whose possession the contraband is said to have been recovered, which is more than commercial quantity and which has been provided by Akachi (Ntatom Philipi @ Kaka), was going to deliver the said contraband to the present petitioner. He further submits that three other criminal cases, including two of the similar nature, are also pending against the accused-petitioner, which show the previous conduct of the accused-petitioner. 4. Considered the submissions made by the counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor and perused the challan papers. 5. As per the facts on record, when the Police stopped a person coming on a scooty and search was made, a contraband having 77 gram MD was recovered from the possession of that person, namely; Dilip Kumar. In the statement recorded under [2026:RJ-JP:15826] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-2919/2026] Section 67 of the NDPS Act, co-accused, Dilip Kumar, discloses that he used to purchase the contraband from Akachi (Ntatom Philipi @ Kaka) and deliver the same to the accused-petitioner. 6. As per the evidence collected during investigation there is money transaction in between the accused-petitioner and the Akachi (Ntatom Philipi @ Kaka). It has also come out that the petitioner is having online money transaction with the foreigners and there are certain other criminal cases pending against him, out of which, two of the offences are punishable under the provisions of the NDPS Act. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner is not able to convince this Court as regards the satisfaction required under Section 37 of the NDPS Act. 8. Taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances of the case and more particularly the fact that two other criminal cases of the similar nature are pending against the accused-petitioner and there is evidence which connect him with the alleged offence, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the accused-petitioner on bail. 9. Accordingly, the bail application is dismissed. (GANESH RAM MEENA),J SHRUTI SHARMA /15