[2025:RJ-JP:14861] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 4000/2025 Hanumanram S/o Ramlal, Aged About 45 Years, R/o Khileriyo Ki Dhani Nedanagar Lohawat Police Station Lohawat District Falodi(Raj) (At Present Confined In Sub District Jail Aklera District Jhalawar Raj) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rohit Khandelwal For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vivek Choudhary, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN 02/04/2025 1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.398/2024 registered at Police Station Aklera, District Jhalawar (Rajasthan) for the offence punishable under Section 8/15 of NDPS Act. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submit that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that no contraband has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner and he has been made accused in this case solely on the basis of police interrogation of the co-accused person namely- Jagdish who was found in possession of the alleged contraband. It is submitted that aforementioned co-accused person has already been granted benefit of bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court. [2025:RJ-JP:14861] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-4000/2025] Counsel submits that there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioner and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Petitioner is in custody since his date of arrest and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. 4. I have considered the contentions. 5. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner, especially the fact that no contraband has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner, so also considering the fact that co-accused namely- Jagdish who was found in possession of the alleged contraband has been granted benefit of bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court; there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioner and trial of the case will take considerable time in its conclusion as well as looking to the period of custody, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it fit and proper to allow this bail application. 6. 6. The bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner- Hanumanram S/o Ramlal shall be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court with the stipulation that he shall appear before that Court and any court to [2025:RJ-JP:14861] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-4000/2025] which the matter is transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. 7. It is made clear that the accused-petitioner shall not involve in any other offence(s) during currency of the bail and he shall mark his presence in second week of every month in the concerned police station. 8. If any breach of these conditions is reported or come to the notice of the Court, the same shall alone be a reason for the trial court to cancel the bail granted to him by this Court. 9. Concerned SHO is directed to maintain a register recording the attendance of the petitioner. In case the petitioner fails to mark his presence in the concerned police station, the concerned SHO is directed to immediately report the matter to the concerned Court in this regard. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J LALIT MOHAN /262