[2025:RJ-JP:37408] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Misc. 2nd Bail Application No. 10228/2025 Gohil Kanak Singh S/o Jem Bhai, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Khari Village, Police Station Bagdana, District Bhavnagar (Gujarat), Tenant Resident Of Plot No. 2 Third Floor, Jyoti Society, Gotala Wadi Katargram, Surat City, District Surat (Gujarat), Presently Residing On Rent At House No. 159 G.a.f. Tulsi Home Society Valenza Road To Shekhpur Road Near Anand Vatika Society, Village Valenza, Police Station Kamrez, District Surat (Gujarat). (At Present In District Jail At Ajmer). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Additional PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajaram Chaudhary with Ms. Sonali Kharra For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 15/09/2025 1. This second bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.298/2021 registered at Police Station Sarwad, District Ajmer for offence punishable under Section 8/15 of NDPS Act. After completion of investigation, police filed charge- sheet against the petitioner for offence punishable under Section 8/25 of NDPS Act. 2. The first bail application preferred on behalf of the petitioner was dismissed by this court vide order dated 18.02.2025 while giving liberty to renew the prayer for bail after submission of [2025:RJ-JP:37408] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-10228/2025] result of investigation. Now, charge-sheet has been filed thus, this second bail application has been preferred. 3. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that bare perusal of the charge-sheet would reveal that there is no allegation against the petitioner of knowingly giving permission to use his vehicle for carrying the contraband. It is submitted that admittedly, said vehicle was in possession of one Koyaram and he died on 07.10.2021. It is contended that there are no criminal antecedents of similar nature against the petitioner and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Counsel submits that petitioner is in custody since 25.11.2024 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 4. Learned State counsel opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. He submits that matter pertains to recovery of commercial quantity of contraband therefore, considering the rigour under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, bail should not be granted to the petitioner. 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 considering the fact that prima facie, no material is appearing in the charge-sheet to suggest the fact that petitioner knowingly gave permission to use his vehicle for carrying contraband, so also the fact that there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioner of similar nature [2025:RJ-JP:37408] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-10228/2025] 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 this second bail application. 7. This second bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner - Gohil Kanak Singh S/o Jem Bhai, 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 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 the first 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. 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. 10. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the concerned SHO for necessary compliance. [2025:RJ-JP:37408] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-10228/2025] 11. 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. 12. The observations made hereinabove are only for decision of the bail application and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J CHARU SONI /203