Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2026 DAILYLAW 9335 (RAJ)

NEPAL SINGH S/O SHRI SHANKAR SINGH v. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CRLMB/8308/2026 · 2026-07-06

Anoop Kumar Dhand

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2026:RJ-JP:25082] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 8308/2026 URN: CRLMB / 15139U / 2026 Nepal Singh S/o Shri Shankar Singh, R/o Tumbadiya, Police Station Saadas, District Chittorgarh (Raj.) ----Petitioner Versus The State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ravindra Singh Shekhawat For Respondent(s) : Mr. Manvendra Singh Shekhawat, PP JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 06/07/2026 1. The instant anticipatory bail application under Section 482 BNSS has been filed by the petitioner apprehending his arrest in connection with the FIR No.49/2026, registered with the Police Station Sri Nagar, District Ajmer for the offences under Sections 8/18 of NDPS Act. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no evidence against the petitioner to connect him with the alleged crime. Counsel submits that the petitioner has been falsely booked in the instant case on the basis of confessional statement of the co-accused. Counsel submits that under these circumstances, indulgence of pre- arrest/anticipatory bail be granted to the petitioner. 3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the prayer and submitted that two similar cases under NDPS Act have been lodged against the petitioner. Public Prosecutor further submits that the petitioner is a habitual offender and he is in habit of repeating and [2026:RJ-JP:25082] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-8308/2026] committing the similar offence again and again, hence, the petitioner does not deserve indulgence of bail. 4. Heard and considered the submissions made at the Bar and perused the material available on the record. 5. Considering the arguments put forward by learned Public Prosecutor and looking to the fact that two similar cases have already been registered against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant benefit of pre-arrest/anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 6. Accordingly, the instant anticipatory bail application under Section 482 BNSS stands rejected. 7. However, the petitioner would be at liberty to surrender before the Court concerned and submit an application for bail. 8. In case, the petitioner appears before the Court concerned, his bail application would be decided in accordance with law. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J KuD/10