Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Suresh Kumar @ Sanny vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jd:1564) on 12 January, 2026
Author: Kuldeep Mathur
Bench: Kuldeep Mathur
[2026:RJ-JD:1564]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2nd Bail Application No. 10341/2025
Suresh Kumar @ Sanny S/o Sahab Ram, Aged About 36 Years,
R/o Kikrali, Police Station Nohar, District Hanumangarh (At
Present Lodged At Jail Bikaner)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anand Purohit, Sr. Adv. assisted
by Mr. Mayank Roy
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shriram Choudhary, PP.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR
Order Reserved on: 18/12/2025 Pronounced on: 12/01/2026
1. This second application for bail under Section 483 BNSS (439 Cr.P.C.) has been filed by the petitioner who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.433/2024 registered at Police Station Rawatsar, District Hanumangarh for offences under Sections 8/15 and 25 of the NDPS Act.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, as per the prosecution, on 06.08.2024 at around 3:27 AM, the SHO of Police Station Rawatsar, along with police personnel, during routine patrolling reached near Najad cremation ground on the link road from Mega Highway to Chak 22 AG, whereupon on the left side of the road two persons were seen loading a bag on a motorcycle from a Bolero vehicle parked nearby. Upon seeing the police party, both of them got startled and tried to flee. On sufficient grounds (Uploaded on 12/01/2026 at 06:22:49 PM) (Downloaded on 12/01/2026 at 08:50:03 PM) [2026:RJ-JD:1564] (2 of 6) [CRLMB-10341/2025] of suspicion, the motorcycle and the Bolero vehicle were stopped and two persons were found sitting inside the Bolero vehicle, while one person was riding the motorcycle. The person riding the motorcycle disclosed his name as Suresh Kumar @ Sanny (present petitioner), and the persons sitting inside the Bolero vehicle were identified as Vinod Kumar and Kamlesh Kumar.
3. Upon searching the motorcycle and the Bolero vehicle at around 04:00 AM, the police team recovered contraband (poppy husk/straw) weighing 152 kilograms from the motorcycle bearing registration No. DL-9-SAH-5972 and the Bolero vehicle bearing registration No. RJ-49-UA-0109. On being asked by the police personnel, they failed to produce any valid licence or permit to possess the said contraband. The search and seizure proceedings were completed by 08:30 AM on 06.08.2024, and the petitioner and co-accused persons were arrested on the spot.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. To substantiate this contention, attention of the Court was drawn towards the pin-to-pin report and route chart of the GPS of the offending vehicle bearing registration No. RJ-49-UA-0109, procured by the investigating officer from the GPS company. Learned counsel submitted that a perusal of the same would reveal that the offending vehicle bearing registration No. RJ-49- UA-0109 remained stationary at Police Station Rawatsar from 11:03 PM on 05.08.2024 till 03:27 AM on 06.08.2024, i.e., at the time of the alleged recovery. The said vehicle was standing at Police Station Rawatsar till 05:12 AM on 06.08.2024. Therefore, the search and seizure proceedings, as conducted by the (Uploaded on 12/01/2026 at 06:22:49 PM) (Downloaded on 12/01/2026 at 08:50:03 PM) [2026:RJ-JD:1564] (3 of 6) [CRLMB-10341/2025] investigating agency, are inconsistent with the GPS location and pin-to-pin report of the offending vehicle.
5. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner has been implicated in the present case by the investigating agency on the basis of a false and fabricated story, allegedly orchestrated by the police team.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the petitioner approached the competent criminal court by filing an application under Section 94 of BNSS seeking production of the petitioner's location, and the same came to be allowed by the competent criminal court vide order dated 23.04.2025, whereby the concerned authority was directed to produce the location of the petitioner's mobile phone. However, the investigating agency utterly failed, despite several notices, to produce the same. It was vehemently submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that such conduct on the part of the investigating agency demonstrates intentional neglect and an attempt to falsely implicate the petitioner for an offence he did not commit.
7. Lastly, learned counsel submitted that the investigating agency has committed a gross abuse of the process of law, thereby unjustifiably entangling the petitioner in vexatious and frivolous criminal proceedings devoid of any merit, and initiated with mala fide intentions to scapegoat the petitioner in the present case. It was further submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 06.08.2024; the investigation in the matter has already been completed and the challan has been filed before the competent criminal court; and the trial of the case is likely to take (Uploaded on 12/01/2026 at 06:22:49 PM) (Downloaded on 12/01/2026 at 08:50:03 PM) [2026:RJ-JD:1564] (4 of 6) [CRLMB-10341/2025] a considerable time to conclude. Therefore, the benefit of bail may be granted to the accused-petitioner.
8. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application. He submitted that contraband (poppy husk/straw) greater than commercial quantity has been recovered from the conscious possession of the present petitioner and therefore, the rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act are attracted in the present case. Learned Public Prosecutor further submitted that there is no infirmity in the search and seizure proceedings and that merely on the basis of defence documents such as GPS reports, the prosecution case cannot be disbelieved at the stage of bail. It was, therefore, prayed that the bail application be rejected.
9. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Special Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.
10. This Court is conscious of the fact that the present case involves recovery of commercial quantity of contraband and that the provisions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act impose stringent conditions for grant of bail. However, it is equally well settled that even in cases involving commercial quantity, bail is not completely barred and can be granted where the Court is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is not guilty of the alleged offence and that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail.
11. In the present case, this Court finds that the petitioner has been able to raise serious and substantial doubts with regard to the prosecution version, which require consideration at the stage of trial. The pin-to-pin GPS report and route chart of the Bolero vehicle bearing registration No. RJ-49-UA-0109, placed on record, (Uploaded on 12/01/2026 at 06:22:49 PM) (Downloaded on 12/01/2026 at 08:50:03 PM) [2026:RJ-JD:1564] (5 of 6) [CRLMB-10341/2025] prima facie indicate that the said vehicle was shown to be stationed at Police Station Rawatsar during the relevant time period when the alleged recovery is stated to have been effected at a different location. Such material, at this stage, casts a shadow of doubt over the prosecution narrative and cannot be brushed aside as inconsequential.
12. Further, this Court finds substance in the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that despite an order passed by the competent criminal court under Section 94 of BNSS directing production of the petitioner's mobile phone location, the investigating agency failed to comply with the said order. Non- production of such relevant electronic evidence, despite judicial directions, prima facie reflects adversely on the fairness of investigation and lends support to the petitioner's contention of false implication.
13. The petitioner is in judicial custody since 06.08.2024. The investigation has already been completed and the challan has been filed before the competent court. Thus, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is no longer required. The trial, considering the nature of offence and number of witnesses, is likely to take a considerable period of time to conclude.
14. Taking into consideration the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the discrepancies emerging from the GPS data, the conduct of the investigating agency, and the fact that the investigation in the matter has already been concluded, this Court is of the considered opinion that the twin- conditions enumerated under Section 37 of the NDPS Act are duly satisfied in the present case. Thus, without expressing any opinion (Uploaded on 12/01/2026 at 06:22:49 PM) (Downloaded on 12/01/2026 at 08:50:03 PM) [2026:RJ-JD:1564] (6 of 6) [CRLMB-10341/2025] on the merits/demerits of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.
15. Consequently, this second bail application under Section 483 BNSS (439 Cr.P.C.) is allowed and it is ordered that the accused- petitioner - Suresh Kumar @ Sanny S/o Sahab Ram shall be enlarged on bail in connection with FIR No.433/2024 registered at Police Station Rawatsar, District Hanumangarh, provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing as and when called upon to so.
16. It is however, made clear that findings recorded/observations made above are for limited purposes of adjudication of bail application. The trial court shall not get prejudiced by the same.
(KULDEEP MATHUR),J Dinesh/-
(Uploaded on 12/01/2026 at 06:22:49 PM) (Downloaded on 12/01/2026 at 08:50:03 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)