Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 15421 (RAJ)

LAKHANPAL S/O SHRI GANPAT v. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CRLMB/5113/2025 · 2025-05-20

Maneesh Sharma

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:21256] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 5113/2025 Lakhanpal S/o Shri Ganpat, R/o Devan, Tehsil Shahpura, District Jaipur (Rajasthan) (At Present In Sub Jail Shahpura, Distt. Jaipur). ----Petitioner Versus The State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Om Prakash Pareek For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shree Ram Dhakar, Dy.GA. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANEESH SHARMA Order 20/05/2025 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.82/2025 registered at Police Station Shahpura, Jaipur Rural, for the offence punishable under Sections 8, 21 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that the alleged recovered contraband is below the commercial quantity. He further submits that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 04.03.2025 and there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioner and the trial of the case will take considerable time, therefore, further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. [2025:RJ-JP:21256] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-5113/2025] 3. Learned Deputy Government Advocate has opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 4. Heard the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 5. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner, as also the fact that the alleged recovered contraband is below the commercial quantity; absence of criminal antecedents of the petitioner; period of custody, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it just and proper to allow this bail application. 6. The bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that the accused-petitioner Lakhanpal S/o Shri Ganpat 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. 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 first week of every two months 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. [2025:RJ-JP:21256] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-5113/2025] 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. (MANEESH SHARMA),J Seema/199