[2025:RJ-JP:35914] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 5786/2025 Abhishek Meena @ Kanha S/o Bhagwan Sahay, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Meena Mohalla, Near Ayurvedic Hospital, Udaipuriya, Police Station Samod, District Sikar (Raj.) (At Present Confined In District Jail, Jaipur). ----Petitioner Versus The State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajveer Singh Gurjar For Respondent(s) : Mr. Tapesh Agarwal, PP with 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.80/2025 registered at Police Station Kaladera, District Jaipur Rural (Raj.) 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 no contraband has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner and he has been made accused in this case solely on the basis of interrogation/investigation of co-accused namely- Haripal Meena who was found in possession of contraband (Ganja) weighing 11Kg 815gram. Counsel submits that the said co-accused person [2025:RJ-JP:35914] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-5786/2025] has already been granted benefit of bail by the learned trial court. Trial of the case will take considerable time in its conclusion. Counsel submits that petitioner is in custody since 03.04.2025 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. He submits that though no recovery has been made from the possession of the petitioner but he is a habitual offender as several other cases have been registered against him under the NDPS Act. 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 both the parties, especially considering the fact that no contraband has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner, so also the fact that aforementioned co-accused person who was found in possession of contraband has already been granted benefit of bail by learned trial court 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 application. 6. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner - Abhishek Meena @ Kanha S/o Bhagwan Sahay, 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 [2025:RJ-JP:35914] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-5786/2025] 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 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 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 him by this Court. 10. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the concerned SHO for necessary compliance. 11. The observations made hereinabove are 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 GAUTAM JAIN /58