[2025:RJ-JP:32859] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 8839/2025 1. Vaseem S/o Naushad, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Khairabad, P.s. Ramganjmandi District Kota Rural (Raj.). (At Present Confined At Sub Jail Bhawanimandi) 2. Anwar S/o Abdul Majeed, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Mochi Mohalla Bhanpura P.s. Bhanpura District Mandsaur (M.P.) (At Present Confined At Sub Jail Bhawanimandi). ----Petitioners Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 9213/2025 Latif Shah @ Latif Kaka S/o Kallushah, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Fakir Mohlla Shamgarh, Distt. Mandsaur (M.P.) (Presently Confined In Sub Jail Bhawani Mandi). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Abdul Kalam Khan Mr. Aman Ali For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 20/08/2025 1. These bail applications have been filed under Section 483 of BNSS on behalf of the petitioners, who have been arrested in connection with FIR No.290/2025 registered at Police Station Bhawani Mandi, District Jhalawar for the offences under Sections 8/22 and 8/29 of NDPS Act. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that the accused-petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. It is submitted that matter pertains to recovery of 7 gram of (Methylenedioxymethamphetamine) MDMA which is admittedly [2025:RJ-JP:32859] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-8839/2025] less than commercial quantity. It is contended that trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. It is submitted that petitioners have no criminal antecedents of similar nature and they are in custody since their date of arrest. Further custody of the petitioners would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners. 4. I have considered the contentions. 5. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the argument advanced by learned counsel for the petitioners, as also considering the fact that recovered contraband is less than commercial quantity, petitioners have no criminal antecedents of similar nature 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 these bail applications. 6. These bail applications are accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioners (1) Vaseem S/o Naushad, (2) Anwar S/o Abdul Majeed, and (3) Latif Shah @ Latif Kaka S/o Kallushah, shall be released on bail provided each of them 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 they 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:32859] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-8839/2025] 7. It is made clear that the accused-petitioners shall not involve in any other offence(s) during currency of the bail and they shall mark their 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 petitioners, as directed above. In case the petitioners fail to mark their 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. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the concerned SHO for necessary compliance. 10. 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 them by this Court. 11. The observations made hereinabove are only for decision of these bail applications and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J CHARU SONI /210-211