[2025:RJ-JP:34186] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Misc. 2nd Bail Application No. 8761/2025 Subhash Singh S/o Kala Singh, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Mardanhedi, Tehsil Samana, Dist. Ratiala (Punjab) (Petitioner Is In Sub Jail Ramganjmandi). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ali Mohd. Khan For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 27/08/2025 1. This second bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.110/2024 registered at Police Station Suket, District Kota Rural for the offence punishable under Section 8/15 of NDPS Act. After completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet against the petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 8/15 and 8/25 of the NDPS Act. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It is submitted that there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioner and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Learned counsel argues that petitioner is in custody since 04.04.2024 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. It is argued that in identical circumstances, facility of bail has been granted by [2025:RJ-JP:34186] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-8761/2025] Hon’ble Supreme Court where accused persons have suffered incarceration for the period of more than 18 months (two and half years). 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. He submits that commercial quantity of contraband (Poppy Husk) weighing more than 795kg has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner therefore, looking to the rigour of Section 37 of NDPS Act, benefit of bail should not be granted to the petitioner. It is further submitted that till date, not a single witness has been examined. 4. I have considered the contentions. 5. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the arguments advanced at bar, especially considering the fact that commercial quantity of contraband (Poppy Husk) weighing more than 795kg has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner and trial is at initial stage, thus, looking to the nature and gravity of offence, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. 6. Accordingly, this second bail application is dismissed. 7. However, petitioner would be at liberty to renew the prayer for bail after recording testimony of the seizure officer. 8. 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 CHARU SONI /98