[2025:RJ-JP:32321] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 9987/2025 Manish Kumar S/o Rameshwar Lal, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Ward No. 08, 8 Dola Rawla, Police Station Rawla, District Ganganagar (Raj.). (At Present Confined In Sub Jail, Bhawani Mandi, Jhalawar) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 10109/2025 Sadhna Gaud D/o Kalulal, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Ward No. 35, Neminagar Lal Bhag, Jhalrapatan P.s. Jhalrapatan District Jhalawar (Raj.) (Presently Accused Petitioner Confined In Sub Jail Bhawani Mandi). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kapil Nagayach Mr. Anmol Dhakar For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 19/08/2025 1. These instant bail applications have been filed under Section 483 of BNSS., on behalf of the petitioners, who have been arrested in connection with FIR No.332/2025 registered at Police Station Bhawani Mandi, District Jhalawar (Raj.) for the offence punishable under Sections 8/15 & 8/29 of NDPS Act. [2025:RJ-JP:32321] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-9987/2025] 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that the accused-petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel submit that alleged recovered quantity is below commercial quantity. Counsel submits that one other case has also been registered against the petitioner-Manish Kumar wherein he has been acquitted on the basis of compromise. Petitioners are in custody since their date of arrest & trial of the case will take considerable time. Further custody of the petitioners would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by 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 arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioners as also the fact that alleged recovered quantity is below commercial quantity; trial will take 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 applications. 6. These bail applications are accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioners – 1) Manish Kumar S/o Rameshwar Lal & 2) Sadhna Gaud D/o Kalulal 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 [2025:RJ-JP:32321] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-9987/2025] any court to 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-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. 8. Concerned SHO is directed to maintain a register recording the attendance of the petitioners, as directed above. In case the petitioner 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. 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. 10. Office is directed to send copy of this order to the concerned SHO for necessary compliance. 11. 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 GAUTAM JAIN-277-278