[2026:RJ-JP:25997] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 7459/2026 URN: CRLMB / 13582U / 2026 Kartik Rathore S/o Pradeep Singh, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Village Shyampura Kalva, Police Station Parbatsar, Nagaur District Nagaur. At Present Plot No. 9 Kalyan Colony, Khatipura Mod, Police Station Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur (At Present Accused Confined In Central Jail, Jaipur). ----Accused Petitioner Versus State of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. A.K. Gupta, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Sarwat Alam, Advocate Mr. Ashutosh Singh Naruka Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sudesh Kumar Saini, Addl. GA Mr. Manvendra Singh Shekhawat, Dy. GA Mr. Devi Singh Chaudhary, Dy. GA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BHUWAN GOYAL Order 10/07/2026 1. This bail application has been filed by the petitioner under Section 483 BNSS, 2023 in FIR No. 0044/2026 registered at Police Station, Vaishali Nagar, District Jaipur (West) for the offence under Section 8/22 of NDPS Act, 1985. 2. Learned Sr. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this matter. The petitioner was not informed the grounds of his arrest. The arrest of the petitioner is in violation of Articles 21 and 22 of the Constitution of India as also Section 47 and 48 of BNSS, 2023. The petitioner is in [2026:RJ-JP:25997] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-7459/2026] judicial custody since 7.2.2026. The conclusion of trial is likely to take long time, hence he may be released on bail. 3. In support of his contentions, he has placed reliance upon the following judgments: I) Prabir Purkayastha Versus State (NCT of Delhi) reported in (2024) 8 Supreme Court Cases 254 II) Vihaan Kumar Versus State of Haryana and Another reported in (2025) 5 SCC 799 III) Mihir Rajesh Shah Versus State of Maharashtra and Another reported in (2026) 1 SCC 500 IV) Dr. Rajinder Rajan Versus Union of India & Anr. - 226 LiveLaw (SC) 327 V) Jhabra Ram Versus State of Rajasthan passed in S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 4778/2026 4. Learned Addl. GA as well as learned Dy. GA have opposed the same and submit that as per point no. 10 of the arrest memo, the grounds of arrest were duly informed to the petitioner. They further submit that from the arrest memo detailing out the facts of the case, it is clear that the accused had substantive knowledge of the offence and the reason for his detention. The petitioner was in custody on the basis of judicial order. Thus, it cannot be said that his arrest was illegal. They further submit that procedural lapses and technical irregularities cannot be used to defeat justice. They further submit that after investigation, when the offence was found to have been made out against the petitioner, charge sheet was filed against him. They further submit that during search, 10.79 Gms. M.D. Drug was found from the clothes of the petitioner. The said contraband [2026:RJ-JP:25997] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-7459/2026] article is more than commercial quantity. They further submit that 2 other cases were registered against the petitioner, out of which one case is related to NDPS Act. Thus, the petitioner is a habitual offender, hence he should not be granted bail. 5. In support of their contentions, they have place reliance upon the judgment 15.12.2025 passed by the Allahabad High Court in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 19091 of 2025 titled Nitin Kumar Singh @ Nitin Versus State of UP and 4 others. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and more particularly in view of the fact that 10.79 Gms. M.D. Drug, which is more than commercial quantity, was recovered from the petitioner, without commenting on the merits and demerits of the case, I do not deem it just and proper to grant bail to the petitioner. 7. Accordingly the bail application filed by the petitioner is dismissed. (BHUWAN GOYAL),J DK/8