[2025:RJ-JP:32851] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 10160/2025 1. Lokesh Kumar Suthar S/o Shri Jagdish, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Pitaji Ka Kheda Post Khacharol P.s. Mandalgarh, District Bhilwara At Present In Cetral Jail Ajmer 2. Laxman Meena S/o Nanda, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Devisingh Ji Ka Kheda Post Khacharol, P.s. Mandalgarh, District Bhilwara Rajasthan.at Present In Cetral Jail Ajmer ----Petitioners Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 10519/2025 Narayanlal S/o Kanhaiyalal @ Khana, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Triveni Choraha Post Khachrol, P.s. Bigod, District Bhilwara (Raj.) (At Present Lodged In Sub Jail, Kekri). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pradeep Sharma Mr. Jai Prakash Gupta For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 20/08/2025 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. 179/2023 registered at Police Station Sawar, District Kekri (Rajasthan) for the offence punishable under Section 8/15 of NDPS Act. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that the accused-petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. [2025:RJ-JP:32851] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-10160/2025] Counsel submits that admittedly, no contraband has been recovered from the possession of the petitioners. Counsel submit that petitioners have been made accused solely on the basis of police interrogation of the co-accused who is owner of the vehicle in which alleged contraband has been recovered. Counsel submits that co-accused Rajkumar has already been granted benefit of bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court. It is submitted that trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Petitioners Lokesh Kumar Suthar & Laxman Meena are in custody since 28.06.2025 and petitioner Narayanlal is in custody since 25.06.2025 and further custody of the petitioners would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by the 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 no contraband has been recovered from the possession of the petitioners; co-accused Rajkumar has been granted benefit of bail by co-ordinate bench of this Court; trial will take time in its conclusion as well as looking to the period of custody, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow these bail applications. 6. These bail applications are accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioners – (1) Lokesh Kumar Suthar S/o Shri Jagdish, (2) Laxman Meena S/o Nanda & (3) Narayanlal S/o Kanhaiyalal @ Khana, shall be released on bail [2025:RJ-JP:32851] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-10160/2025] 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 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. In case the petitioners fail to mark their presence in the concerned police station, 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 a copy of this order to the concerned SHO for necessary compliance. 11. The observations made hereinabove are only for decision of the instant bail applications and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J LALIT MOHAN /318-319