Supreme Court – Daily Orders
Rupindrajit Singh @ Rupinderjit @ … vs State Of Jharkhand on 24 February, 2026
SLP (CRL.) NO. 17221/2025
ITEM NO.2 COURT NO.13 SECTION II-A
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
PETITION FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL (CRL.) NO. 17221/2025
[Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 29-08-2025
in BA No. 7879/2025 passed by the High Court of Jharkhand at
Ranchi]
RUPINDRAJIT SINGH @ RUPINDERJIT @ RUPINDRAJEET SINGH PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS
STATE OF JHARKHAND RESPONDENT(S)
IA No. 273138/2025 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T., IA No. 39910/2026
- PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES
Date : 24-02-2026 This matter was called for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN
For Petitioner(s) :
Mr. D. K. Devesh, AOR
Mr. Shashank Kumar Saurav, Adv.
Mr. Suprabh Kumar Roshan, Adv.
For Respondent(s) :
Mr. Kumar Anurag Singh, Adv.
Mr. Anando Mukherjee, AOR
Mr. Shwetank Singh, Adv.
Mr. Utkarsh Anand, Adv.
Mrs. Riya Dhingra, Adv.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed by
POOJA SHARMA
Date: 2026.02.24
16:55:03 IST
Reason:
1
SLP (CRL.) NO. 17221/2025
O R D E R
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with
Chauparan P.S. Case No. 199 of 2024 corresponding to
N.D.P.S. Case No. 44 of 2024 for the offences registered
under Sections 414, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860,
and Sections 17(c), 18(c), 29, 61 and 62 of the Narcotic
Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, pending in
the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-X,
Hazaribag.
3. The petitioner is said to be the driver of the
vehicle from which 18 plastic bags containing a total of
301 kg of Poppy Husk was recovered. Learned counsel for
the petitioner submitted that he along with the
cleaner/khalasi and three other persons (two being
labourers who were loading the sacks on the truck and
the third being the owner of the hotel in front of which
the truck was standing) were named as accused. However,
it was submitted that the other three persons have been
granted bail. It was further contended that the
petitioner having no criminal antecedents and being 38
2
SLP (CRL.) NO. 17221/2025
years of age was a mere driver, and the consignment did
not belong to him. It was submitted that he had no
discretion as he had to only ply the vehicle as per the
instructions given by the owner, or the party who hires
the truck. Moreover, it was submitted that initially
this Court had rejected the prayer for bail on
04.04.2025, after which almost 11 months have elapsed
and the Court may consider such intervening factor and
grant bail to the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the respondent-State opposes the
prayer submitting that all points available to the
petitioner have already been taken into consideration by
this Court on 04.04.2025 and after that the prayer for
bail was rejected and thus, today also the petitioner
standing in the same position; no indulgence should be
granted to him.
5. At this juncture, when the Court put a direct query
to the learned counsel for the State with regard to
almost 11 months having elapsed since the last bail was
rejected, and also the undisputed position that there
are no criminal antecedents of the petitioner, why such
position be not taken into consideration, learned
counsel for the State could not offer any satisfactory
3
SLP (CRL.) NO. 17221/2025
objection.
6. Having considered the matter in its entirety and
going through the material on record, prayer for bail is
allowed and the petitioner is directed to be released on
bail on such terms and conditions as may be imposed by
the learned Trial Court, subject to his cooperation in
the investigation/trial.
7. The Special Leave Petition stands disposed of in the
above terms.
8. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed
of.
(POOJA SHARMA) (KOMAL)
AR-CUM-PS COURT MASTER (NSH)
4
