[2025:RJ-JP:34790] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 10620/2025 Kaluram @ Heeralal @ Rajesh S/o Surgyan, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Datuli, Police Station Mitrapura, District Sawai Madhopur (Raj.) (Presently Confined In District Jail Tonk). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Bhavana Ladha for Mr. Sandeep Kumar Maheshwari For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 29/08/2025 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.14/2025 registered at Police Station Datwas, District Tonk for the offence punishable under Section 8/18 of NDPS Act. After completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet in this matter for the offence punishable under Section 8/29 of NDPS Act. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel submits that no contraband has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. It is submitted that co- accused persons namely- Mahaveer Prasad and Balram were found in possession of contraband (Opium) and they have already been granted benefit of bail by this Court. Learned counsel argues that [2025:RJ-JP:34790] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-10620/2025] there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioner of similar nature and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. It is argued that petitioner is in custody since 20.01.2025 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by the 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, as also the fact that aforementioned co-accused persons, who were found in possession of the contraband (Opium) have already been granted benefit of bail by this court, so also the fact that there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioner of similar nature and trial will take considerable 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 this bail application. 6. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner – Kaluram @ Heeralal @ Rajesh S/o Surgyan, 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 [2025:RJ-JP:34790] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-10620/2025] 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 /189