[2025:RJ-JP:13991] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Second Bail Application No. 4055/2025 1. Karan Singh S/o Sheetal Singh, Aged About 20 Years, R/o Khurshedpur Police Station Sidwan Bed District Ludhiana(Punjab) ( At Present Confined In Sub District Jail Bhawani Mandi District Jhalawar (Raj.) 2. Mangal Singh S/o Santokh Singh, Aged About 47 Years, R/o Akbarwala Police Station Makkhu District Firozpur (Punjab)( At Present Confined In Sub District Jail, Bhawani Mandi District Jhalawar) ----Petitioners Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rohit Khandelwal For Respondent(s) : Ms. Arti Sharma, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 27/03/2025 1. The instant second bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS on behalf of the petitioners, who have been arrested in connection with FIR No.11/2025 registered at Police Station Mishroli, District Jhalawar (Rajasthan) for the offences punishable under Sections 8/15 & 8/29 of NDPS Act. 2. First bail application of the petitioners was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to renew the prayer of bail after filing of result of investigation. Now, charge-sheet has been filed thus, this second bail application has been preferred. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. It is submitted that [2025:RJ-JP:13991] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-4055/2025] s alleged recovered contraband is below commercial quantity. It is submitted that there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioner- Karan Singh whereas three other cases have been registered against the petitioner- Mangal Singh. It is contended that trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Petitioners are in custody since 18.01.2025 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner and submits that petitioner- Mangal Singh is a habitual offender as three other cases have been registered against him out of which he has been convicted in two cases which were registered under the NDPS Act and Excise Act, respectively. 5. I have considered the contentions. 6. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by the counsel for the parties, so also considering the fact that petitioner Mangal Singh has previously been convicted under the NDPS Act and Excise Act, I do not find any good ground to change my earlier view. Accordingly, this bail application is dismissed qua accused petitioner No.2 Mangal Singh S/o Santokh Singh. 7. So far as accused-petitioner No.1 Karan Singh is concerned, considering fact that alleged recovered contraband is below commercial quantity, charge-sheet has been filed in this matter; absence of criminal antecedents against the petitioner and; trial will take considerable time in its conclusion as well as looking to the custody period, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow the bail [2025:RJ-JP:13991] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-4055/2025] s application qua petitioner No.1. 8. This second bail application is accordingly partly allowed qua petitioner No.1 and it is directed that accused-petitioner Karan Singh S/o Sheetal Singh 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 which the matter is transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. 9. 9. It is made clear that the accused-petitioner Karan Singh 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. 10. 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. 11. 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 /395