[2025:RJ-JP:30228] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 8487/2025 Kalu S/o Kanhaiya Lal, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Prempuriya Binjari, Police Station Harnawdashahji, District Baran, Rajasthan. (Accused Presently Confined At District Jail Karauli). ----Accused-Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Bhim Singh Meena, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP with Mr. Tapesh Agarwal, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 05/08/2025 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.438/2024 registered at Police Station Sapotara, District Karauli for the offences punishable under Sections 8/21 and 8/29 of NDPS Act. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He submits that co-accused of this case, who was found in possession of contraband, has already been granted benefit of bail by a Co- ordinate Bench of this Court. He further submits that admittedly, 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 of the co-accused person, who was found in possession of the alleged contraband. He argues that [2025:RJ-JP:30228] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-8487/2025] trial of the case will take considerable time in its conclusion. He argues that the petitioner is in custody since 16.06.2025 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that petitioner is a habitual offender as three other cases have been registered against him, out of which two cases are under the NDPS Act and investigation is pending. 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 parties, especially the fact that investigation is still pending against the petitioner and looking to the criminal antecedents of the petitioner, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I do not find it a fit case to allow this bail application. 6. This bail application is accordingly dismissed. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J MADAN/212