Rajasthan High Court – Jodhpur
Sishpal vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:32950) on 25 July, 2025
[2025:RJ-JD:32950]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 2355/2025
Sishpal S/o Gumana Ram, Aged About 20 Years, R/o Chikni Nadi,
Chandanpura,p.s. Lohawat Dist Falodi (Raj.). (Presently Lodged
In Dist Jail Jodhpur)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shiv Kumar Bhati.
Mr. Bharat Gurjar.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Hanuman Prjapati, PP.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUKESH RAJPUROHIT
Order
25/07/2025
1. This application for bail under Section 483 of BNSS (439
Cr.P.C.) has been filed by the petitioer who has been arrested in
connection with F.I.R. No.198/2023 registered at Police Station
Balesar, District Jodhpur Rural, for offences under Section 8/15 of
the NDPS Act.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material
available on record.
3. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the
petitioner, aged 19 years, has been falsely implicated in this case.
The contraband was allegedly recovered from a vehicle in which
the petitioner was travelling, and the recovery was made from the
body of the truck.
(Downloaded on 28/07/2025 at 09:37:03 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:32950] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-2355/2025]
4. It is contended on behalf of the accused-petitioner that no
case of alleged offence is made out against the petitioner and he
is in judicial custody since 13.08.2023 (1 year, 11 months, and 12
days as on today). While it’s true that, there is a fetter under
Section 37 of the NDPS Act regarding grant of bail to an accused
having illegal possession of commercial quantity of contraband but
a fundamental right of speedy trial to him cannot be permitted to
be flouted.
5. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the
petitioner placed reliance on the judgment rendered by the
Hon’ble Supreme Court in Rabi Prakash Vs. State of Orisa
(Leave to Appeal (Criminal) No.4169/2023 and Mohd
Muslim @ Hussain Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) in Special Leave
Petition (Crl.) No(s).915 of 2023.
6. Learned counsel has further placed reliance on the judgment
of Honb’le Supreme Court in the case of Balwinder Singh Vs.
State of Punjab & Anr. (Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.)
No.8523/2024), in which, while granting bail it has been
observed as under:
“9. The incident in the present case occurred on 25.06.2020 and the
petitioner was arrested soon thereafter on 26.06.2020. By now, 6 co-
accused have been granted bail. As the prosecution wishes to
examine 17 more witnesses, the trial is unlikely to conclude on a
near date.
10. Considering the above and to avoid the situation of the trial
process itself being the punishment particularly when there is
presumption of innocence under the Indian jurisprudence, we deem it
appropriate to grant bail to the petitioner – Balwinder Singh. It is
ordered accordingly. Appropriate bail conditions be imposed by the
learned trial court.”
7. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also placed reliance on
the judgment passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in
(Downloaded on 28/07/2025 at 09:37:03 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:32950] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-2355/2025]
Avtar Singh Vs. State Of Rajasthan [S.B. Criminal
Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 13483/2024], decided on
22.05.2025, wherein, while allowing the bail application, it was
observed as under:
“7. In Rabi Prakash Vs. State of Odisha passed in
Special leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.(s) 4169/2023, Hon’ble
the Apex Court has again passed an order dated 13th
July, 2023 dealing this issue and has held that the
provisional liberty(bail) overrides the prescribed
impediment in the statute under Section 37 of the NDPS
Act as liberty directly hits one of the most precious
fundamental rights envisaged in the Constitution, that
is, the right to life and personal liberty contained in
Article 21.
8. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of
the case and the fact that petitioner is behind the bars
for around more than two years thus, looking to the fact
that there is high probability that the trial may take long
time to conclude and given the flagrant non-compliance
with these mandatory provisions, this Court finds that
the continued detention of the petitioner is not justified
thus it is deemed suitable to grant the benefit of bail to
the petitioner.
9. It is nigh well settled law that at a pre-conviction
stage; bail is a rule and denial from the same should be
an exception. The purpose behind keeping an accused
behind the bars during trial would be to secure his
presence on the day of conviction so that he may
receive the sentence as would be awarded to him.
Otherwise, it is the rule of Crimnal Jurisprudence that
he shall be presumed innocent until the guilt is proved.
8. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the charge-
sheet has already been filed and the petitioner is currently facing
trial. As per the status report of trial, charges have not yet been
framed against the petitioner even after the filing of the challan
and the trial is likely to take considerable time. It is further
contended that the petitioner had no knowledge of the presence of
(Downloaded on 28/07/2025 at 09:37:03 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:32950] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-2355/2025]contraband in the vehicle, therefore, the benefit of bail be granted
to the accused-petitioner.
9. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail
application and submitted that looking to the nature of allegation
and seriousness of the offence, the petitioner does not deserve
indulgence of bail. However, he is not in a position to dispute the
fact that the petitioner is 19 years old, has no previous criminal
antecedents, is in custody since 13.08.2023 (1 year, 11 months,
and 12 days as on today).
10. Having considered the rival submissions, overall facts and
circumstances of the case, particularly the petitioner’s young age,
prolonged custody & the likelihood of delayed conclusion of trial
and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this
Court deems it just and proper to enlarge the petitioner on bail.
11. Consequently, the bail application under Section 483 of BNSS
(439 Cr.P.C.) is allowed. It is ordered that the accused-petitioner
Sishpal S/o Gumana Ram, arrested in connection with F.I.R.
No.198/2023 registered at Police Station Balesar, District Jodhpur
Rural, shall be released on bail, if not wanted in any other case,
provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- and two
sureties of Rs.50,000/- each, to the satisfaction of learned trial
court, for his 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
1-/Jitender//-
(Downloaded on 28/07/2025 at 09:37:03 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
