Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Chagan Dan vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:22919) on 12 May, 2025
[2025:RJ-JD:22919]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 3126/2025
Chagan Dan S/o Jhujhdan, Aged About 35 Years, R/o W.No.05
Delitalai, Police Station Pugal, District - Bikaner (Raj)
(Lodged In District - Jail, Bikaner)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Bhagirath Ray Bishnoi
Mr. Manohar Singh Hada
Mr. Mukesh Kumar Bishnoi
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Lalit Kumar Sen, Public Prosecutor
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SHRIMALI
Order
12/05/2025
This application for bail under Section 483 of BNSS (439
Cr.P.C.) has been filed by the petitioner who has been arrested in
connection with F.I.R. No.233/2024, registered at Police Station
Chhatargarh, District - Bikaner for offences under Sections 8/15,
25 & 29 of the NDPS Act.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned
Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that as per the
case of the prosecution, at the Nakebandi at 16 K.L.D on
searching the vehicle pick-up bearing registration No.RJ-07-GC-
9621 in possession with co-accused Govind Singh, Ashok Singh
and Parmeshwar Singh @ Prem, 87.500 kg illegal narcotic
contraband Doda Post without Dunthal have been recovered. The
[2025:RJ-JD:22919] (2 of 5) [CRLMB-3126/2025]
allegation against the accused persons is of supplying narcotic
contraband to the accused Govind Singh, Ashok Singh and
Parmeshwar Singh and escorting the vehicle i.e. pick-up which
was carrying narcotic contraband. Learned counsel for the
petitioner argued that accused-petitioner has been falsely
implicated in the present case. The narcotic contraband have not
been recovered from the conscious possession of the present
petitioner.
Learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the orders
passed by the Coordinate Benches of this Court i.e. order dated
17.01.2023, passed in S.B. Criminal Misc. 2nd Bail Application
No.13746/2022 : Rajnish Kumar Vs. State of Rajasthan,
dated 28.03.2023, passed in S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail
Application No.11942/2021 : Om Prakash Vs. State of
Rajasthan and the order dated 30.01.2023, passed in S.B.
Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.15816/2022 : Shrawan
Kumar Vs. State of Rajasthan and submitted that on the basis
of call details only, the accused persons cannot be enroped in the
case of NDPS Act and they are entitled to be released on bail.
Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that recovered
narcotic contraband Doda Post Danthal is not covered under the
definition of narcotic contraband as prescribed under Section 2 of
the NDPS Act.
Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the
accused is in judicial custody since 28.11.2024 and the trial of the
case will take sufficiently long time, therefore, the accused-
petitioner may be enlarged on bail.
[2025:RJ-JD:22919] (3 of 5) [CRLMB-3126/2025]
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed
the bail application and submitted that accused has committed a
serious crime under the NDPS Act. He is the main supplier of the
narcotic contraband to the co-accused from whose possession the
illegal contraband has been recovered. Present petitioner is also
involved in escorting the vehicle of the co-accused in his Creta car
bearing registration No.RJ-13CE-8475 and the same has also been
seized. There is WhatsApp call & voice call details on record.
Thus, there is active involvement of the present petitioner in
commission of the crime. Therefore, he prayed that looking to the
gravity of the offence, benefit of bail may not be extended to the
petitioner.
From the seizure memo of the mobile phone of accused -
petitioner Chhagan Dan, it is revealed that there were
conversation took place between accused-petitioner Chhagan Dan
and the co-accused Ashok Singh. There is voice call on record
made between these accused persons. There were transaction for
sale-purchase of the Doda Post. Co-accused Ashok Singh made
payment for all the purchase. On 19.08.2024, Rs.11,999/- and
Rs.1/- were transferred through Phonepe by the accused Govind
Singh to the account of Chhagan Dan. On 20.08.2024, Rs.4020/-
has been transferred from phonepe number of co-accused
Parmenshar to the account of accused Chhagan Dan and on
13.04.2024, Rs.1,000/- was transferred. Screen shots of these
transactions were taken and the same have been taken on the
case file which clearly suggest the involvement of the present
petitioner in the commission of crime. The doda post has been
[2025:RJ-JD:22919] (4 of 5) [CRLMB-3126/2025]
stated to be supplied by the accused-petitioner Chhagan Dan to
the co-accused persons. The recovered narcotic contraband is
also above the commercial quantity.
The question whether Doda Post Danthal is covered/not
covered under the definition of narcotic contraband as per
provisions of Section 2 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic
Substances Act, this fact will be decided on merit at the time of
passing of the judgment. At the time of disposal of present bail
application, the same cannot be answered. There are three other
cases pending against the present petitioner under the Rajasthan
Excise Act.
Co-accused Parmeshwar Singh @ Prem in his disclosure
statement has stated that accused-petitioner Chhagan Dan has
took out the kattas containing Doda Post Danthal and put the
same in the Pick up. Co-accused Govind Singh also admitted the
said fact in his disclosure statement.
Accused Chhagan Dan in his information given under Section
23(2) of the Indian Evidence Act has stated that he had loaded
four kattas of Doda Post Danthal in the pick-up of co-accused
Ashok Singh, Govind Singh, Paremshwar @ Prem. The place from
where the Doda Post Danthal was taken was also belonged to
accused-petitioner Chhagan Dan. The provisions of Section 37 of
the NDPS are duly satisfied in the present case.
The orders cited by learned counsel for the petitioner
belongs to call details of accused persons with the another
accused persons.
[2025:RJ-JD:22919] (5 of 5) [CRLMB-3126/2025]
In the present case, from the documents available on record,
this Court finds that there is active involvement of the accused-
petitioner in loading the contraband substance from his house and
he was also escorting the vehicle pick up in which narcotic
contraband was being taken. The judgments cited by the learned
counsel for the petitioner does not give any help to the present
petitioner.
This Court finds that at this stage, when the Investigating
Officer and other relevant prosecution witnesses are yet to be
examined, it cannot be said that the accused has not committed
any offence. The involvement of the accused in the commission of
offence can be ascertained only after recording of the statements
of the witnesses. No comment can be made on the
merits/demerits of the case at this stage.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case,
this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the accused-petitioner.
The bail application is, therefore, rejected at this stage.
(CHANDRA PRAKASH SHRIMALI),J
56-Ramesh Goyal, P.S./-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
