[2025:RJ-JP:15465] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 4939/2025 Hemraj S/o Chitarmal, Aged About 55 Years, R/o Khatalio Ki Dhani Asalpur Police Station Jobner At Present R/o Plot Number 31 Karni Sthal 200 Feet Byepass Heerapura Police Station Karnivihar Jaipur (At Present In Sub Jail, Shambhar Lake, Jaipur). ----Accused-Petitioner Versus The State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Javed Mohd. Khan, Adv., and Ms. Seema Moyal, Adv., for Mr. Yunus Khan, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Ms. Arti Sharma, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 07/04/2025 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.58/2025 registered at Police Station Jobner, District Jaipur Rural for the offence punishable under Section 8/20 of NDPS Act. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel submits that admittedly, no contraband has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner and he has been made accused in this case solely on the basis that the petitioner is the registered owner of the vehicle, wherein co-accused persons were carrying ganja (8.859 kgs) which is below commercial [2025:RJ-JP:15465] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-4939/2025] quantity. He contends that there are no criminal antecedents of similar nature against the petitioner and trial of the case will take considerable time in its conclusion. He argues that the petitioner is in custody since 23.03.2025 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that one other criminal case has been registered against 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 and contraband, below commercial quantity, has been recovered from the possession of the co-accused persons; absence of criminal antecedents of similar nature and trial will take 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 proper to allow the bail application. 6. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner- Hemraj S/o Chitarmal 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:15465] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-4939/2025] 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, till trial is concluded. 8. Concerned SHO is directed to maintain a register recording the attendance of the petitioner, as directed above. In case the petitioner fails to mark his presence in the concerned police station, as directed above, the concerned SHO is directed to immediately report the matter to the concerned Court in this regard. 9. 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. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J MADAN/S-536