[2025:RJ-JP:35907] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 5614/2025 Ravikant S/o Shri Ramkumar, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Karoda, P.S. Khanori, District Sangrur (Punjab) (At Present Confined In Central Jail, Kota). ----Accused-Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Samarth Sharma, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Tapesh Agarwal, PP with Mr. Gaurav Gupta, Asstt.G.A., Mr. Shubham Kumar Sain, AAAG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 08/09/2025 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.21/2024 registered at Police Station Simliya District Kota Rural for offence punishable under Section 8/15 of the NDPS Act. After completion of investigation, police has filed charge-sheet in this matter in the court concerned and the case is at the stage of prosecution evidence. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He has nothing to do with the alleged offences. The petitioner is in custody since 25.01.2024 and as such, he has already suffered incarceration of nearly 18 months. Investigation has been completed and charge sheet has been filed and as such, nothing is [2025:RJ-JP:35907] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-5614/2025] to be recovered from him. Co-accused have already been granted bail. It is also contended that no independent witness has been associated during the search and seizure proceedings and as such, the whole recovery proceedings have become doubtful. He argues that as per the prosecution case, in the intervening night of 24.01.2024 and 25.01.2024, at about 12.05 AM, nakabandi was made by the police party at Toll Plaza Simliya. At about 12:57 AM, one SUV car (No.0080) came there. The driver of the said car was signaled to stop the car but he did not stop the car and after hitting the barricades, he took away the car from there in high speed. In between this, the car met with an accident. Two persons got down from the car and ran away in the nearby fields. Both were chased by the police party, out of them, one person, the petitioner herein was apprehended. Learned counsel submits that as per the material available on record, no CCTV footage of the concerned Toll Plaza was recovered by the IO which was a very important piece of evidence, which again creates a serious doubt on the prosecution story. Lastly he submits that trial will take considerable time in its conclusion as there are as many as 29 witnesses and a few witnesses have examined till date. The petitioner does not have any criminal antecedents 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. He submits that huge quantity of contraband has been recovered from the petitioner and thus, in view of the rigour of Section 37 of NDPS Act, the petitioner does not deserves indulgence of bail. 4. I have considered the contentions. [2025:RJ-JP:35907] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-5614/2025] 5. In the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner, as also looking to the fact that the petitioner is in custody since 25.01.2024, and till date a few witnesses out of 29 witnesses have been examined; the petitioner does not have any criminal antecedents and as per prosecution case, no CCTV footage has been collected from the concerned Toll Plaza 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 Ravikant S/o Shri Ramkumar, arrested in connection with FIR No.21/2024 PS Simliya 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. However, it is made clear that the petitioner shall not involve in similar offence(s) during currency of bail granted by this Court. The petitioner is further directed to mark his presence in the concerned police station in first week of every month, 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 [2025:RJ-JP:35907] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-5614/2025] station, as directed above, the concerned SHO is directed to immediately report the matter to the concerned Court in this regard. 9. If breach of any 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 petitioner by this Court. 10. Office is directed to send copy of this order to the concerned SHO for necessary compliance. 11. The observation made hereinabove is only for decision of the instant bail application and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J Sudhir Asopa/54