[2025:RJ-JP:32231] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 9787/2025 Taufhan S/o Mohansingh, R/o House No. 25 Arniya Chandrawat, Post Pipliya Haddi Village Arniya Tehsil Manasa District Nimach, Madhyapradesh. (Presently Confined In Central Ajmer). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anish Bhadala For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 18/08/2025 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.100/2017 registered at Police Station Nasirabad Sadar, District Ajmer for the offence punishable under Sections 8A(C)/18 of NDPS Act, 1985. After completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet in this matter for the offence punishable under Section 8/29 of the NDPS Act. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It is submitted that co-accused persons, who were found in possession of contraband have already been granted benefit of bail by Co- ordinate Bench of this Court. It is submitted that petitioner has been made accused in this case simply on the basis of police interrogation of co-accused. It is contended that there are no [2025:RJ-JP:32231] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-9787/2025] criminal antecedents against the petitioner and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Counsel argues that petitioner is in custody since his date of arrest and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. He submits that 2kg opium has been recovered from the possession of the co-accused persons and it has been disclosed by the co- accused persons that they procured the same from the petitioner. 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 petitioner, especially considering the fact that co- accused persons who were found in possession of the contraband have already been granted benefit of bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, as also considering the fact that there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioner 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 the bail application. 6. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner - Taufhan S/o Mohansingh, 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 [2025:RJ-JP:32231] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-9787/2025] which the matter is transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. 7. 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 the 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 petitioner. In case the petitioner fails to mark his presence in the concerned police station, 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 him by this Court. 11. 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 /214