Photo: TrendSPLEND via Wikimedia Commons (CC BY-SA 4.0)
Judgment Intelligence
Bail RejectedNand Kishore v. State of Rajasthan
2026:RJ-JD:42813
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 6014/2026
- Court
- Rajasthan High Court
- Date of Decision
- 25 August 2026
- Bench
- Justice Baljinder Singh Sandhu
- Relevant Acts & Sections
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Sections 8, 21, 37, 42, 50; Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 483
Final Outcome
Bail application dismissed. The observations are confined to the bail application and will not prejudice the trial (para 18).
Key holdings
- Compliance with Section 42 is mandatory, but in emergent situations it may be postponed for a reasonable period (paras 10-11).
- Recording the grounds before a night search and sending them to the superior within 72 hours is prima facie compliance (paras 12-13, 15).
- A gap between the information and the search does not by itself show that a warrant should have been obtained (para 14).
- A bail order granted for total non-compliance with Section 42 does not help where compliance is shown (para 16).
- For commercial quantity, Section 37 bars bail unless there are reasonable grounds to believe the accused is not guilty (para 17).
Brief Facts
On 14.12.2024 the SHO of Pratap Nagar police station, on patrol in Jodhpur, received information at 8:30 pm that the petitioner and another man were at a rented house and that immediate action was needed (paras 2, 12). The police reached the house at about 10 pm and recovered 180 grams of mephedrone (MD) from the petitioner and 157.25 grams from the co-accused (paras 2, 12). The Special Judge refused bail on 27.04.2026 (para 1). The petitioner argued that a night search needed a warrant, that there was time to obtain one, and that nothing showed the information reached the superior officer within 72 hours (paras 3-5).
Court's Findings
Section 42 permits a search of a building between sunset and sunrise without a warrant if the officer records grounds to believe that getting a warrant would allow escape or concealment, and sends a copy to his superior within 72 hours (para 9). Following the Constitution Bench in Karnail Singh, compliance is mandatory, but in emergent situations it may be postponed for a reasonable period; total non-compliance is impermissible (paras 10-11). Here the information was written down at 8:30 pm with the grounds for acting without a warrant, and the superior officer received it at 11 pm the same night (paras 12-13). The night search was therefore not itself a breach, and the argument about time to get a warrant failed because the police reached the spot by 10 pm (paras 13-14). Arjun, a case of total non-compliance, was distinguished (para 16). The trial court will examine compliance fully at trial (para 14).
Legal Principle
A night search of a building without a warrant complies with Section 42 of the NDPS Act if the officer records the information and the grounds for acting without a warrant before the search and sends them to the immediate superior within 72 hours. Total non-compliance, not delayed compliance, is fatal (paras 9-13).
Precedents Relied Upon
- Karnail Singh v. State of Haryana (2009) 8 SCC 539
Constitution Bench: compliance with Section 42 is mandatory; in emergent situations recording the information and sending it to the superior may be postponed for a reasonable period, but total non-compliance is impermissible.
- Arjun v. State of Rajasthan S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 3320/2015, decided on 15.07.2026
Bail was granted there for total non-compliance with Section 42; here the information and grounds were recorded before the search and sent to the superior officer.
