CRLMB/4872/2026 of REKHA W/O SHRI MUKESH Vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN
[2026:RJ-JP:16975]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No.
4872/2026
Rekha W/o Shri Mukesh, Aged About 36 Years, Resident Of
Transport Nagar, Mohalla Bachhdi Kptputali, Police Station Kot -
putali, District Kotputali-Behror (Raj.) (Presently In Sub-Jail Kot-
putli)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P.
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Umesh Vyas
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shree Ram Dhakar, P.P.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA
Order
22/04/2026
1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section
483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 on behalf of
accused-petitioner in connection with FIR No. 150/2026 registered
at Police Station Kotputali, District Kotputli-Behror for offence
under Sections 8, 21 of the N.D.P.S. Act 1985.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case.
Learned counsel further submits that as per the F.I.R., the
allegation levelled against the present accused-petitioner is that
6.03 gram smack has been recovered from his possession, which
is less than commercial quantity. He further submits that the
accused-petitioner is in custody since 22.03.2026 and no other
case of similar nature is pending against the accused-petitioner
and trial of the case is likely to take considerable time to conclude,
therefore, the accused-petitioner may be released on bail.
[2026:RJ-JP:16975] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-4872/2026]
3. Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the
bail application and submits that there is a recovery of 6.03 gram
smack from the possession of the accused-petitioner, therefore,
she does not deserve indulgence of bail by this Court.
4. Considered the submissions made at bar and also
perused the material made available on record.
5. The allegation against the petitioner relates to
commission of offence under the provisions of Sections 8, 21 of
the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and the
alleged recovery from her is of 6.03 gram smack, which is
stipulated to be less than commercial quantity. The restriction for
grant of bail under the provisions of Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act
does not apply in the present case.
6. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Puranmal Jat
Vs. State of Rajasthan in Criminal Appeal No.3394/2023
arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.10670/2023 decided on
02.11.2023 has enlarged the accused therein on bail and
observed as under:-
“The allegations against the appellant relate to com-
mission of offence under the provisions of Sections
8 and 15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic
Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter called “the Act”).
Alleged recovery from him is about 35 kgs. and 150
grams Doda Posh (Poppy straw). The commercial
quantity for poppy straw is 50 kgs. The appellant is
in custody for over seven months. Charge-sheet has
been submitted in the case. The recovered contra -
band item having weight less than the stipulated
commercial quantity, the restriction on grant of bail
[2026:RJ-JP:16975] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-4872/2026]
under Section 37 of the Act does not apply in his
case. We do not think his continued detention pend-
ing trial is necessary in the given circumstances.”
7. Having regard to the submissions made above, this
Court without expressing any opinion on the merits or demerits of
the case, deems just and proper to enlarge the accused- petitioner
on bail.
8. Accordingly, the present bail application is allowed and
it is directed that the accused-petitioner shall be released on bail
provided that he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of
Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lax Only) 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
he 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.
9. However, it is made clear that in case the accused-
petitioner is found to be involved in any other criminal case of
similar nature in future, the prosecution would be at liberty to
move an application for cancellation of this bail order.
(GANESH RAM MEENA),J
Shruti Sharma/41