Rajasthan High Court – Jaipur
Radheshyam @ Radhe S/O Babulal vs The State Of Rajasthan on 4 August, 2026
[2026:RJ-JP:30169]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Second Bail Application No.
7707/2026
CNR: RJHC020460692026 | URN: CRLMB / 14042U / 2026
Harshit S/o Dhannalal, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Devnagar,
Jhalarapatan, Tehsil Bakani, Police Station Bakaani, Distt. Jha-
lawar. (Petitioner Is In Sub Jail Beawar).
----Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
----Respondent
Connected With
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Second Bail Application No.
7708/2026
CNR: RJHC020460722026 | URN: CRLMB / 14043U / 2026
Radheshyam @ Radhe S/o Babulal, Aged About 33 Years, R/o
Kanchnariya Railway Station Ke Pass, Police Station Aklera, Dist.
Jhalawar. (Petitioner Is In Sub Jail Beawar).
—-Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
—-Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Chhavi Chaturvedi, ( 7707/2026),
Ms. Drishti Mishra (7708/2026)
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rishi Raj Singh Rathore, P.P.
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA
Order
04/08/2026
1. These second bail applications have been filed under
Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 on
behalf of accused-petitioners in connection with FIR No. 228/2025
(Uploaded on 05/08/2026 at 05:16:50 PM)
(Downloaded on 05/08/2026 at 09:11:26 PM)
[2026:RJ-JP:30169] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-7707/2026]
registered at Police Station Beawar Sadar, District Beawar for
offence under Sections 8 and 15 of the N.D.P.S. Act 1985.
2. Learned counsel appearing for the accused-petitioner
‘Harshit’ submits that no contraband is said to have been
recovered from his possession. She also submits that there is no
evidence to connect the accused-petitioner with the other co-
accused. She further submits that the petitioner has been impli-
cated as an accused only on the basis of the statements of the co-
accused namely; Sandeep, Kailashchand and Rahul from whose
possession Doda Chura weighing 92 kg. 760 gram was recovered..
It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner Harshit
that in case of Tofan Singh Vs. State of T.N. (2021) 4 SCC
175 the Hon’ble Apex Court observed that the statements of the
co-accused recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS Act cannot be
treated to be a confession. She also submits that the accused-
petitioner is in custody since 01.01.2026 and police after
completion of the investigation, has already submitted charge-
sheet.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the accused-petitioner
‘Radheshyam @ Radhe’ submits that the accused-petitioner has
been implicated in this case with the aid of 8/25 of the NDPS Act.
She submits that no recovery of any contraband has been made
from the accused-petitioner and he is in custody since
26.12.2025.
Learned counsel also relied upon the order dated
08.05.2026 passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Criminal Appeal
No…………………../2026(S.L.P. (Criminal) No. 5187/2026
(Lokesh Poonia Vs. State of Rajasthan).
(Uploaded on 05/08/2026 at 05:16:50 PM)
(Downloaded on 05/08/2026 at 09:11:26 PM)
[2026:RJ-JP:30169] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-7707/2026]
4. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the second bail
applications and submits that the contraband involved in the
present case is more than the commercial quantity and therefore
in view of the provisions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, accused-
petitioners do not deserve to be released on bail as there is suffi-
cient evidence collected during investigation so as to connect them
with the alleged crime.
5. Considered the submissions made by the counsel for
the petitioners as well as learned Public Prosecutor and also
perused the challan papers.
6. As per the facts on record, on interception of a vehicle
alleged contraband i.e. 92.760 kg. Doda Chura was recovered
and there were three persons in the vehicle namely; Sandeep,
Kailashchand and Rahul.
7. The aforesaid co-accused in their statements during
investigation has revealed that they were going to provide the
alleged contraband to the accused-Radheshyam @ Radhe after
purchasing the same from the other co-accused ‘Harshit’, who is
the cultivator and there is licence in the name of his father. As per
the charge-sheet, there is no evidence of any call conversation of
the accused Harshit with the other co-accused.
8. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that there are call
details as regards the conversation of the co-accused Radheshyam
@ Radhe with the other co-accused.
9. Merely the call details cannot be the only basis for
conviction of an accused until and unless there is sufficient
evidence that the call conversation was in regard to the
transaction of the alleged contraband.
(Uploaded on 05/08/2026 at 05:16:50 PM)
(Downloaded on 05/08/2026 at 09:11:26 PM)
[2026:RJ-JP:30169] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-7707/2026]
10. Taking into consideration the overall facts and
circumstances of the case, the Court feels just and proper to
record its satisfaction as required under Section 37 of the NDPS
Act. Hence, this Court without expressing any opinion on the
merits or demerits of the case, deems just and proper to enlarge
the accused- petitioners on bail.
11. Accordingly, the these second bail applications are
allowed and it is directed that the accused-petitioners shall be
released on bail provided that they furnish a personal bond in the
sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lax Only) (each) together with
two sureties in the sum of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand
Only) (each) to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court with the
stipulation that they shall appear before that Court or any Court to
which the matter is transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing
and as and when called upon to do so.
12. A copy of this order be placed in connected bail
application.
(GANESH RAM MEENA),J
1,2/SHRUTI SHARMA
(Uploaded on 05/08/2026 at 05:16:50 PM)
(Downloaded on 05/08/2026 at 09:11:26 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
