[2025:RJ-JP:32773] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 9667/2025 Govind Singh S/o Devi Singh, Aged About 43 Years, R/o Kherkheda, Police Station Javad, District Neemach, Madhya Pradesh (Presently Lodged In Central Jail Ajmer). ----Accused-Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Javed Khan, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP with Mr. Tapesh Agarwal, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 20/08/2025 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.232/2023 registered at Police Station Bhinai, District Kekri 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 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 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 [2025:RJ-JP:32773] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-9667/2025] the co-accused person, who was found in possession of the alleged contraband. He argues that charge-sheet has already been filed and trial of the case will take considerable time in its conclusion. He argues that the petitioner is in custody since 28.08.2024 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 four other cases have been registered against him, out of which three cases are under the NDPS Act. 4. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in three cases, no recovery has been made from the possession of the petitioner. He relies upon the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Shambhulal Gurjar @ Rohit vs. State of Rajasthan in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.16671/2024 wherein after taking note of the fact that three other cases under the NDPS Act have been registered against the petitioner, facility of bail was granted to the accused considering the period of incarceration. 5. I have considered the contentions. 6. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner, especially the fact that co-accused of this case, who was found in possession of contraband, has been granted benefit of bail by this Court; no contraband has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner; charge-sheet has been filed and trial will take time in its conclusion as well as [2025:RJ-JP:32773] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-9667/2025] looking to the period of custody, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow the bail application. 7. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner- Govind Singh S/o Devi Singh 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. 8. 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 and third week of every month in the concerned police station, till trial is concluded. 9. Concerned SHO is directed to maintain a register recording the attendance of the petitioner, as directed above. In case the petitioner fails to mark his 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. 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 him by this Court. 11. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the [2025:RJ-JP:32773] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-9667/2025] concerned SHO for necessary compliance. 12. The observation 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 MADAN/S-305