[2025:RJ-JP:36005] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 7480/2025 Murali Manohar S/o Nathulal, R/o Kotada Bhagwan, Tehasil Chipabarod, Distt. Baran (Raj.) (Petitioner Is In Sub. Jail Ram- ganjmandi). ----Petitioner Versus The State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ali Mohd. Khan For Respondent(s) : Mr. Tapesh Agarwal, PP with Mr. Gaurav Gupta, Asstt. G.A. 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.14/2023 registered at Police Station Suket, District Kota Rural (Rajasthan) for the offence punishable under Section 8/15 of NDPS Act. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that admittedly, no contraband has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner and he has been made accused on the basis of disclosure made by co-accused persons. Counsel submits that similar situated co-accused namely Arvind Bheel and Vishnu Prasad have already been granted benefit of bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court. Counsel submits that charge-sheet has been filed in this matter. Counsel further submits that there are no [2025:RJ-JP:36005] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-7480/2025] criminal antecedents of the petitioner and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Petitioner is in custody since his date of arrest and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by counsel for 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, as also the fact that no contraband has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner; similar situated co-accused namely Arvind Bheel and Vishnu Prasad have been granted benefit of bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court; charge-sheet has been filed in this matter; there are no criminal antecedents of the petitioner and trial will take considerable 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 fit and proper to allow this bail application. 6. The bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner- Murali Manohar S/o Nathulal 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. [2025:RJ-JP:36005] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-7480/2025] 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. 8. 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. 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. 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 LALIT MOHAN /84