Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 27065 (RAJ)

BANWARI LAL S/O SHRI RAMKALYAN v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CRLMB/10123/2025 · 2025-09-10

Anil Kumar Upman

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:36708] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 10123/2025 Banwari Lal S/o Shri Ramkalyan, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Ward No. 9, Bhavpura, Teh. Chhipabarod, District Baran, Rajasthan. (Presently Confined In Sub District Jail, Ramganj Mandi, Kota). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Manish Choudhary For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP with Mr. Gaurav Gupta, Asst. G.A. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 10/09/2025 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.176/2023 registered at Police Station Suket, District Kota Rural for the offence punishable under Section 8/15 of NDPS Act. During the course of investigation, offences punishable under Sections 8/25 and 8/29 have also been added. 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 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 police interrogation of co-accused who was found in possession of contraband. Learned counsel contends that other co-accused persons have already been granted benefit of bail by this Court as well as Co-ordinate Bench of this Court. It [2025:RJ-JP:36708] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-10123/2025] is contended that there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioner and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. It is argued that petitioner is in custody since his date of arrest and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for 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 no contraband has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner, so also the fact that other co-accused persons have already been granted benefit of bail by this Court as well as Co- ordinate Bench of this Court, there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioner and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion, 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- Banwari Lal S/o Shri Ramkalyan, shall be released on bail provided, he shall furnish 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 [2025:RJ-JP:36708] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-10123/2025] Court to which the matter is transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. 7. 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 /85