[2025:RJ-JP:27903] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Second Bail Application No. 9257/2025 Jasveer Singh S/o Shri Balkar Singh, Aged About 42 Years, R/o Amiwala, Dharkot, District Moga, Punjab. (At Present Confined In Jail Faridkot-Punjab). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ravinder Kumar For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP with Mr. Tapesh Agarwal, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 25/07/2025 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.113/2023 registered at Police Station Nasirabad Sadar, District Ajmer (Raj.) for the offence punishable under Section 8/15 of NDPS Act. After completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet in this matter for the offences punishable under Sections 8/15, 8/29 & 8/25 of NDPS Act. 2. The first bail application filed on behalf of the petitioner was dismissed by this court vide order dated 20.02.2025. Now, this second bail application has been preferred. 3. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that admittedly, no contraband has been [2025:RJ-JP:27903] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-9257/2025] recovered from the possession of the petitioner and he has been made accused in this case solely on the basis of the fact that he is registered owner of the vehicle in which contraband was being carried by the co-accused person. Counsel submits that co- accused namely- Billa Singh who was found in possession of the contraband has already been granted benefit of bail by this Court vide order dated 16.04.2025. Counsel submits that so far three criminal antecedents of the petitioner are concerned, he has been acquitted in one case, in second case, no contraband has been recovered from his possession and he has been granted benefit of bail and in third case, after considering all the facts, bail was granted to him. Counsel submits that in these circumstances, this bail application may be considered for grant. It is submitted that trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Counsel contends that petitioner is in custody since 06.06.2023 and as such, he has suffered incarceration of more than two years and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 4. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail application. He submits that matter pertains to recovery of commercial quantity of contraband. He further submits that petitioner is a habitual offender as on earlier three occasions, he has been found involved in the offence under the NDPS Act and during currency of the bail in those cases, another offence under the NDPS Act has been committed by him by making available his vehicle for carrying the contraband. 5. I have considered the contentions. [2025:RJ-JP:27903] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-9257/2025] 6. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by both the parties, material available on record in the form of charge-sheet, as also considering the fact that on earlier three occasions, petitioner has been found involved in the offence under the NDPS Act and during currency of bail in those cases, another offence under the NDPS Act has been committed by him therefore, this Court is not in a position to record its satisfaction that in case petitioner is released on bail, he will not commit another offence thus, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. 7. Accordingly, this second bail application stands dismissed. 8. The observations made hereinabove is 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 /37