[2025:RJ-JP:26418] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2nd Bail Application No. 5146/2025 Amrit Choudhary S/o Ramniwas, Aged About 45 Years, R/o Near Railway Station, Ward No. 08, Pipar Shahar, Police Station Pipar Shahar, District Jodhpur (Raj.) (At Present Confined At Central Jail Kota). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Arvind Bhadu For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Punia, Public Prosecutor HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA Order 15/07/2025 1. The instant 2nd bail application has been filed under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 on behalf of accused-petitioner in connection with FIR No.26/2023 registered at Police Station Mandana, District Kota Rural for the offences under Sections 8/15 and 8/29 of the NDPS Act. 2. Learned counsel for the accused-petitioner submits that the accused-petitioner is in custody since 03.02.2023 and out of total 16 witnesses only 7 have been examined so far. Learned counsel also submits that the accused has right of speedy trial as provided under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and he has also referred an order of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court passed in the case of Shoukeen Vs. State of Rajasthan (S.B. Criminal [2025:RJ-JP:26418] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-5146/2025] Misc. Second Bail Application No.10928/2023) decided on 29.09.2023. 3. Learned counsel further submits that due to delay in trial, the accused-petitioner deserves to be released on bail as his right of speedy trial has been violated. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application and submits that this is a case where 391 Kg doda chura (Poppy Straw) which is much more than commercial quantity has been recovered from the possession of the accused- petitioner. He further submits that the delay in trial is because of adjournment being sought by the accused party on many occasions. 5. Considered the submissions made at bar and also perused the material available on record including the order-sheets of the learned trial Court. 6. First bail application of the accused-petitioner was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 10.02.2025 with liberty to file fresh bail application before the learned trial Court at appropriate stage. 7. The only submission of counsel for the accused-petitioner is that the accused-petitioner is in custody since 03.02.2023 and only 7 of total 16 prosecution witnesses have been examined so far and the accused-petitioner deserves to be released on bail in view of his right of speedy trial provided under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. 8. Considered the submissions and perused the material made available on record. [2025:RJ-JP:26418] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-5146/2025] 9. On perusal of the order-sheets of the learned trial Court since after 21.04.2025, which have been placed before this Court by counsel for the accused-petitioner which are taken on record, the Court finds that as per the order-sheets one of the accused- Dinesh Thori was not present before the learned trial Court on 17.05.2025, 12.06.2025, 20.06.2025 and 04.07.2025 and the cross-examination were deferred on the request of learned counsel for one of the accused. 10. In view of the aforesaid facts, it cannot be said that right of speedy trial of the accused-petitioner has been violated. 11. Taking into consideration overall facts and circumstances of the case and so also the allegations against the accused-petitioner and more particularly the conduct of the accused party in delaying the trial, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the accused- petitioner on bail. 12. Accordingly, this second bail application is dismissed. 13. However, looking to the custody period of the accused- petitioner, the learned trial Court is directed to conclude the trial at earliest. No adjournments be allowed or no exemptions from personal appearance of the co-accused be allowed without any convincing reasons. (GANESH RAM MEENA),J Ashish Kumar /4