[Cites 6, Cited by 0]
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Lalu Ram vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:53204) on 8 December, 2025
[2025:RJ-JD:53204]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 14302/2025
Lalu Ram S/o Ram Chandra, Aged About 35 Years, R/o
Khatyakheri Ps Nahargarh Tehsil Sitamau Dist Mandsore, Mp At
Present Lodged In Sub Jail Pindwara
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ram Niwas Bishnoi
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Surendra Bishnoi, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUKESH RAJPUROHIT
Order
08/12/2025
The instant application for bail under Section 483 of BNSS
(439 of Cr.P.C.) has been filed by petitioner who has been arrested
in the present matter. The requisite details of the matter are
tabulated herein below:
S. No. Particulars of the case
2. Police Station Pindwara
3. District Sirohi
4. Offences alleged in the FIR Sections 8 and 18 of NDPS
Act
5. Offences added, if any Sections 29 and 25 of NDPS
Act
Learned counsel further submitted that allegation against
present petitioner is false and fabricated. It is further submitted
that recovery of alleged contraband was stated to be affected on
09.04.2025, whereas, samples were forwarded to the FSL for
examination only on 04.06.2025, resulting in an unaccounted
(Uploaded on 09/12/2025 at 05:18:25 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:53204] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-14302/2025]
delay of approximately 57 days. Learned counsel argues that such
an unexplained lapse creates a reasonable possibility of tampering
with the samples, which cannot be ruled out. Further, Clause 1.13
of Standing Order No.1/1988 dated 15.03.1988, mandates that
samples drawn ought to have been sent for FSL examination
within 72 hours from recovery. He, therefore, urges that benefit of
doubt ought to be extended to the petitioner. He has also
submitted that there are no previous criminal antecedents against
the petitioner.
Learned counsel also submits that as per averments in the
FIR, alleged recovery was effected in the morning and as per
provisions of Section 42 of the NDPS Act, it is mandatory to obtain
prior authorization from a competent authority for search and
seizure. These mandatory requirements, however, were not
complied with in the present case.
In support of his contentions, learned counsel for the
petitioner has placed reliance upon the judgment rendered by the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rambabu v. State of Rajasthan
[SLP (Crl.) No.5648/2025 and SLP (Crl.) No.5732/2025],
decided on 13.08.2025, wherein relief was granted considering the
delay and lack of substantive evidence.
Moreover, challan has already been filed and petitioner has
been in custody since 09.04.2025 (about 07 months and 29 days)
and trial of case will take sufficiently long time, therefore, benefit
of bail may be granted to accused-petitioner.
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently
opposed bail application and submits that allegedly recovered
(Uploaded on 09/12/2025 at 05:18:25 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:53204] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-14302/2025]
narcotic contraband viz. Opium, exceeds commercial quantity
threshold, being 3.390 kgs. However, he does not refute the
samples were sent for FSL after a delay of about 57 days.
Having heard and considered the rival submissions, facts and
circumstances of the case as well as perused material available on
record; considering the fact that Clause 1.13 of Standing Order
No.1/1988 dated 15.03.1988, mandates that samples drawn
ought to have been sent for FSL examination within 72 hours from
recovery; challan has already been filed and petitioner has been in
custody since 09.04.2025 (about 07 months and 29 days) and
trial of case will take sufficiently long time to conclude; without
expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of the case, this Court
is inclined to enlarge petitioner on bail.
Consequently, bail application under Section 483 of BNSS
(439 of Cr.P.C.) is allowed. It is ordered that accused-petitioner as
named in the cause title, arrested in connection with above
mentioned FIR, shall be released on bail, if not wanted in any
other case, provided he/she/they furnishes a personal bond of
Rs.50,000/- and two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each, to the
satisfaction of learned trial court, for his/her/their appearance
before that court on each & every date of hearing and whenever
called upon to do so till completion of the trial.
(MUKESH RAJPUROHIT),J
33-mSingh/-
(Uploaded on 09/12/2025 at 05:18:25 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
