Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Heera Ram vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:44539) on 10 October, 2025
[2025:RJ-JD:44539]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 11554/2025
Heera Ram S/o Prarbha Ram, Aged About 25 Years, Resident Of
Dungarwa, P.s. Bagoda, District Jalore (Rajasthan).
(Presently Lodged In District Jail, Jalore)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
Connected With
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 10483/2025
Parveen Kumar S/o Partu, Aged About 22 Years, R/o Turkia Kalla
Ps Kapasan District Chitorgarh
(At Present Lodged In Dist. Jail Bhilwara)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. RS Gill.
Mr. Peerane Khan.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Narendra Gehlot a/w Mr. Urja
Ram, PP.
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MUKESH RAJPUROHIT
Order
10/10/2025
1. These application for bail under Section 483 of BNSS (439
Cr.P.C.) have been filed by the petitioners, who have been
arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.32/2025 registered at Police
Station Badaliyas, District Bhilwara for offences under Section
8/20 of the NDPS Act.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Public
Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.
(Uploaded on 10/10/2025 at 06:36:10 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:44539] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-11554/2025]
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
petitioners have been falsely implicated in the present case.
Learned counsel further submits that though as per the FIR the
allegedly recovered Narcotic contraband is Ganja Leaves & Ganja
Seeds, however, the recovered Ganja Leaves & Ganja Seeds do
not fall within the definition of "Ganja" because they are the part
of cannabis plant which consists of leaves, seeds, buds and stalks
and the leaves & stalks of cannabis plant are expressly excluded
from the definition of Ganja.
3.1. It is further submitted that the Central Government
Notification S.O. 527 dated 16th July, 1996 specifying small
quantity and commercial quantity of Narcotics Drugs and
Psychotropic Substances, does not prescribe any commercial and
small quantity of cannabis plant. Learned counsel submits that the
challan has already been filed in this matter.
3.2. In support of his arguments, learned counsel relied upon
following orders and judgments of Coordinate Benches of this
Court and orders and judgments passed by the Hon'ble Bombay
High Court and the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court:
i. SB Cr. Misc. 2nd Bail No.4232/2017: Ladu Vs. State,
decided on 25.5.2017
ii. SB Cr. Misc. Bail Appl. No.4402/2020: Bhura Ram Vs.
State, decided on 27.5.2020
iii. SB Cr. Misc. Bail Application No.8874/2020 :
Dhanaram Vs. State, decided on 3.9.2020
iv. Anticipatory Bail Appl. No.2173/2022: Kunal Dattu
Kadu Vs. UOI, decided on 29.8.2022 (Bombay High
Court)
v. SB Cr. Misc. Bail Application No.12894/2021 :
Bhagchand Vs. State & Ors. decided on 4.10.2021
vi. SB Cr. Misc. Bail Application No.9279/2022 : Vinod
Kumar Vs. State of Raj, decided on 7.7.2022 vii. SB
Cr. Misc. Bail Application No.11230/2022 : Shrawan
Lal Meena Vs. State, decided on 22.7.2022
(Uploaded on 10/10/2025 at 06:36:10 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:44539] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-11554/2025]
viii. Cr. Misc. Application No.22599/2021 : Fatesang @
Kalubhai Harisangbhai Masani Vs. State of Gujarat,
decided on 2.5.2022 (Gujarat High Court)
ix. Bail application No.951/2022: Santosh Apposo Naik
Vs. State of Maharashtra, decided on 13.5.2022
(Bombay High Court)
3.3. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioners are in
custody since long and the trial of the case will take sufficiently
long time, therefore, the benefit of bail may be granted to the
accused-petitioners.
4. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently
opposed the bail application, however, he is not in a position to
refute a fact that the allegedly recovered narcotic contraband
"Ganja" (Leaves & Seeds) does not come under the definition of
NDPS Act.
5. Having considered the rival submissions, facts and
circumstances of the case; after perusing the record, considering
that Section 2 (iii)(b) of the NDPS Act contains the definition of
Ganja and as per the definition clause flowering of fruiting tops of
cannabis plant falls within the ambit of Ganja, the seeds and
leaves without tops are not termed as Ganja; without expressing
any opinion on merits/demerits of the case, this Court is inclined
to enlarge the petitioners on bail.
6. Consequently, the instant bail applications under Section 483
of BNSS (439 of Cr.P.C.) are allowed. It is ordered that the
accused-petitioners as named in the cause title, arrested in
connection with the above mentioned FIR, shall be released on
bail, if not wanted in any other case, provided each of them
furnish a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two sureties of
Rs.25,000/- each, to the satisfaction of learned trial court, for
(Uploaded on 10/10/2025 at 06:36:10 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:44539] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-11554/2025]
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
170-171-Jitender
(Uploaded on 10/10/2025 at 06:36:10 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
