[2026:RJ-JP:19030] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 12679/2025 Nitesh Singh S/o Shri Nahar Singh, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Kauthal, Police Station Bansur, District Kotputli-Behrod. (Accused Petitioner Is In Central Jail Bharatpur). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 15412/2025 Dholaram S/o Ramniwas, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Ward No. 27, Mohalla Saray, Tapri Marg, Kotputli, Jaipur. ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Narpat Singh Shekhawat For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vijay Singh Yadav, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 05/05/2026 S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 15412/2025: 1. Instant bail application under Section 482 of BNSS is filed for seeking anticipatory bail in a matter arising out of FIR No. 43/2025 dated 06.03.2025 registered at Police Station Gahnoli Mod, Bharatpur for offence under Sections 8/20 and 8/29 of NDPS Act. 2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that SHO, Police Station Gahnoli Mod has stopped a truck container in the [2026:RJ-JP:19030] (2 of 5) [CRLMB-12679/2025] night of 05.03.2025 and allegedly recovered ganja packed in plastic pouches and also kept in gunny bags. He also submitted that the description mentioned in the recovery memo and inventory clearly suggests that the recovered articles are seeds and stems with leaves but not the flowering top as required to establish ganja as defined in Section 2(iii)(b) of NDPS Act. He further submitted that the samples were taken and sent to FSL for examination, but FSL has opined that there was fruiting top hence it is ganja, which is contrary to the memos prepared in relation to recovered articles. He further submitted that when fruiting top and the flowers were not recovered and not sent for examination to FSL, how can FSL opine that the recovered article is ganja. He further submitted that the petitioner was added as an accused only on the statement of a third person who is nowhere connected with the petitioner. He also submitted that there is no independent evidence on record and police has arrayed present petitioner only on the ground that present petitioner is one of the accomplice in commission of crime. 3. Learned counsel has further placed reliance upon order dated 29.08.2022 in case of Kunal Dattu Kadu vs Union of India, Bail Application No. 2173/2022 decided by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay and submitted that in identical situation the accused was granted bail. He further referred order dated 18.04.2023 in case of Navalram vs State of Rajasthan, (Bail Application No. 1347/2023), order dated 24.11.2025 in case of [2026:RJ-JP:19030] (3 of 5) [CRLMB-12679/2025] Ashok vs State of Rajasthan (Bail Application No. 11606/2025) passed by a coordinate Bench at Principal Seat Jodhpur, and order dated 27.02.2024 in case of Rajesh Sharma vs State of Rajasthan (Bail Application No. 2376/2024) passed by a coordinate Bench of this Court, and submitted that when recovered article is not ganja as per definition, then the applicant cannot be arrayed as an accused and he is entitled for anticipatory bail. 4. Aforesaid contentions were opposed by learned Public Prosecutor, who submitted that petitioner is not entitled for anticipatory bail as his name and involvement has been established from the material collected during investigation. 5. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor and perused the material placed on record. 6. In the night of 05.03.2025, SHO, Police Station Gahnoli Mod has intercepted a truck container bearing No. RJ32GB3900 which was driven by Sualal and Nitesh Singh, was working as cleaner, and on search recovered 600 kg of ganja from 40 plastic gunny bags. After the proceedings and drawing memo, FIR No. 43/2025 dated 06.03.2025 was registered at Police Station Gahnoli Mod, Bharatpur under Section 8/20 of NDPS Act. During investigation, police has found that Dholaram @ Pramod Saini, Ankur, Rajbhati @ Mahesh, Kanaram, Dholaram @ Lucky Patel and Satish @ Leelu are also involved in illegal transportation of ganja from Orissa to Rajasthan. The police has also found involvement of Deepak Pradhan @ Dullu Chairman. [2026:RJ-JP:19030] (4 of 5) [CRLMB-12679/2025] 7. Police has already filed charge sheet against Sualal, Nitesh, Deepak and Dholaram @ Pramod under Sections 8/20 and 8/29 of NDPS Act, but kept pending investigation against Ankur, Raj Bhati, Kanaram, Dholaram @ Lucky, Satish @ Leelu and Rahul Yadav and others under Section 193(9) of BNSS. A coordinate Bench has dismissed bail application of Deepak Kumar @ Dullu and Pramod Saini @ Dholaram on 07.01.2026, as both were charged under Section 8/29 of NDPS Act, considering 8. While dismissing the bail applications, a Co-ordinate Bench has considered detailed interrogation report as submitted by police. Herein considering the allegations, there appears to be a ground for detailed investigation as large quantity of ganja was recovered from other accused in the instant case. 9. In case of Navalram (supra) and further in case of Ashok (supra) and Rajesh Sharma (supra), the definition clause under Section 2(iii)(b) of NDPS Act was considered for the purpose of considering definition of ganja. Admittedly, the FSL has opined that the recovered contraband falls within definition of ganja and same is identified as ganja. The description in recovery memo or inventory can be referred during the course of trial before the trial court, but same is not a ground to seek anticipatory bail by other accused, involved in abatement/conspiracy. 10. In case of Kunal Dutta Kadu vs. Union of India (supra), a coordinate Bench at the Bombay High Court has considered a case wherein recovered article report was considered after analysis, and it was found to be a [2026:RJ-JP:19030] (5 of 5) [CRLMB-12679/2025] heterogeneous mixture of fruiting and flowering tops, beads of leaves, stem along with seeds of plants. After taking note of judgment in case of Union of India vs. Shiv Shankar Kehsari (2007) 7 SCC 798 and Section 37 of NDPS Act, anticipatory bail was allowed in the matter registered by Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB). 11. Having considered the totality of facts and circumstances and also the material available on record, this Court is of the considered view that the grounds raised by learned counsel for petitioner are not sufficient to consider the case of present petitioner for grant of anticipatory bail, in particular where a large quantity of alleged contraband is recovered from two of the accused. The bail applications of two accused who are charged under Section 8/29 of NDPS Act were dismissed by a coordinate Bench; therefore, this is not a fit case to enlarge the petitioner on bail. 12. Accordingly, the bail application preferred by petitioner Dholaram S/o Ramniwas is hereby dismissed. S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 12679/2025: 1. Learned counsel for petitioner requests for time. 2. List on 06.05.2026. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J PREETI VALECHA /45-46