[Cites 5, Cited by 0]
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Dinesh Alias Kalu vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jd:19956) on 27 April, 2026
Author: Kuldeep Mathur
Bench: Kuldeep Mathur
[2026:RJ-JD:19956]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 3909/2026
Dinesh Alias Kalu S/o Heera Lal, Aged About 38 Years, Resident
Of Feench, Police Station Luni, District Jodhpur, Rajasthan. (At
Present Lodged In Dist. Jail Pratapgarh)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
Connected With
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 3910/2026
Shivlal S/o Shri Vardichandra, Aged About 40 Years, Resident Of
Gomana, P.s. Chotisadri, District Pratapgarh,rajasthan.
(Presently Lodged In District Jail, Pratapgarh)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vijay Kr. Gaur
Mr. Zeeshan Ali
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Narendra Gehlot, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR
Order
27/04/2026
These second applications for bail under Section 483 BNSS
(439 Cr.P.C.) have been filed by the petitioners who have been
arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.247/2024, registered at
Police Station Chhoti Sadari, District Pratapgarh, for offences
under Sections 8/15 and 29 of NDPS Act.
Heard learned counsel for the parties at Bar. Perused the
material available on record.
(Uploaded on 27/04/2026 at 03:03:09 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:19956] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-3909/2026]
Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the
contraband (poppy husk/straw), weighing 840.445 kgs, was
recovered from the conscious and exclusive possession of the co-
accused, Ram Lal. It was further submitted that the petitioners
have been implicated in the present case solely on the basis of the
disclosure statements of the said co-accused.
Drawing the attention of this Court towards the statements
of the Investigating Officer (PW-2) recorded before the competent
criminal Court, learned counsel submitted that the Investigating
Officer has categorically stated that apart from the disclosure
statements of co-accused Ram Lal, no direct or circumstantial
evidence was found during the course of investigation indicating
the involvement of the petitioners in the commission of the
alleged offence.
Learned counsel further submitted that the co-accused,
Banshi Lal (S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 10045/2025),
has already been enlarged on bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this
Court vide order dated 25.09.2025.
Lastly, learned counsel submitted that the petitioners are in
judicial custody and the trial is likely to take a considerable time;
therefore, they deserve to be enlarged on bail.
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed
the bail applications and submitted that the Investigating Officer
(PW-2), during his examination-in-chief before the competent
criminal court, stated that call detail records between the
petitioners and co-accused Ram Lal were obtained during the
course of investigation. Thus, at this stage, it cannot be said that
(Uploaded on 27/04/2026 at 03:03:09 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:19956] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-3909/2026]
the petitioners have been falsely implicated or that they had no
connection with the co-accused.
In rebuttal, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted
that although the Investigating Officer (PW-2) mentioned during
his examination-in-chief that call detail records had been
obtained, he categorically admitted during cross-examination that
no such call details were actually procured from the concerned
telecom companies. It was reiterated that since the contraband
was not recovered from the conscious possession of the
petitioners, they deserve to be enlarged on bail.
Having considered the rival submissions, the facts and
circumstances of the case, and particularly the fact that the
contraband was not recovered from the conscious possession of
the present petitioners, and that co-accused Banshi Lal has
already been granted bail, this Court, without expressing any
opinion on the merits of the case, is inclined to enlarge the
petitioners on bail.
Consequently, the present second bail applications under
Section 483 BNSS (corresponding to Section 439 Cr.P.C.) are
allowed. It is ordered that the accused-petitioners --(1) Dinesh
@ Kalu S/o Heera Lal and (2) Shivlal S/o Shri Vardichandra,
arrested in connection with FIR No. 247/2024 registered at Police
Station Chhoti Sadari, District Pratapgarh shall be released on bail,
if not required in any other case, upon each of them furnishing a
personal bond in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- along with two
sureties of Rs. 50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial
court, for their appearance before the said court on each and
(Uploaded on 27/04/2026 at 03:03:09 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:19956] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-3909/2026]
every date of hearing and as and when called upon to do so till the
conclusion of the trial.
It is, however, made clear that the observations made herein
are only for the limited purpose of adjudication of the present bail
applications, and the learned trial court shall not be influenced by
the same while deciding the case on merits.
A copy of this order be placed in each file.
(KULDEEP MATHUR),J
252-253--himanshu/-
(Uploaded on 27/04/2026 at 03:03:09 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
