Prithviraj vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jd:17130)
2026 Latest Caselaw 5762 Raj

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Prithviraj vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jd:17130) on 13 April, 2026

Author: Yogendra Kumar Purohit

Bench: Yogendra Kumar Purohit

[2026:RJ-JD:17130]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
     S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 4044/2026

Prithviraj S/o Bakhtawar Jaat, Aged About 58 Years, R/o
Sargaav, P.s. Gangapur, District Bhilwara (Raj). (At Present
Lodged In Sub Jail Gangapur)
                                                                   ----Petitioner
                                    Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
                                                                 ----Respondent


For Petitioner(s)         :     Mr. Mahipal Singh
For Respondent(s)         :     Mr. Prem Singh Panwar,PP



     HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YOGENDRA KUMAR PUROHIT

Order

13/04/2026

1. The instant bail application has been filed by the applicant

Prithviraj S/o Bakhtawar under Section 483 BNSS against the

order impugned passed by learned court below in connection with

FIR No.348/2025 registered at Police Station Gangapur

District Bhilwara for the offence(s) under Sections 8/18

and8/25 of NDPS Act.

2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant

has been falsely implicated in the case. He submits that the

contraband recovered is below commercial quantity. Learned

counsel further submits that previously there is no case under the

NDPS Act registered against the applicant. He further submits that

paragraph 6 of the order of the court below inadvertently records

the weight of the contraband as 590 kg, whereas in paragraph 2,

the weight of the contraband is stated to be 520 grams. Learned

counsel further submits that applicant is behind the bars and trial

(Uploaded on 13/04/2026 at 12:23:47 PM)

[2026:RJ-JD:17130] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-4044/2026]

may take long time to conclude thus, he deserves to be enlarged

on bail.

3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail

application.

4. Considering the submissions advanced on behalf of the

parties, and looking to the overall facts and circumstances of the

case, without commenting on the merits and demerits of the case,

this court deems it just and proper to enlarge the applicant on

bail.

5. Accordingly, the bail application under Section 483 BNSS is

allowed and it is ordered that the accused-applicant shall be

enlarged on bail in the aforesaid FIR provided he furnishes a

personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties of

Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned Lower Court for

his appearance before the court concerned on all the dates of

hearing as and when called upon to do so.

(YOGENDRA KUMAR PUROHIT),J 105-Arti/-

(Uploaded on 13/04/2026 at 12:23:47 PM)

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)