[2025:RJ-JP:16040] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2nd Bail Application No. 13257/2024 Shyam Pratap Singh S/o Late Shri Nathuram, Aged About 26 Years, R/o House No. 30/36/09, Varun Path, Police Station Mansarovar, Jaipur. (At Present Petitioner Lodged In Central Jail Jaipur). ----Petitioner Versus State of Rajasthan, through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ravindra Saini For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rishi Raj Singh Rathore, Public Prosecutor HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA Order 15/04/2025 1. The instant second bail application has been filed under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 on behalf of accused-petitioner in connection with FIR No.21/2024 registered at Police Station Mansarovar, District Jaipur City (South) for the offences under Sections 8/20, 8/21 and 8/22 of the NDSP Act. 2. First bail application of the petitioner bearing S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.2671/2024 was dismissed vide order dated 14.08.2024 after having considered the complete facts and circumstances in the light of the observations made in the case of Shakti Gurjar Vs. State @ Anr. (S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application NO.13814/2023) decided on 30.07.2024. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that at the time of seizure of the contraband, it was already Station House Officer [2025:RJ-JP:16040] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-13257/2024] who has at his own wisdom has identified those substances to be the narcotic drugs whereas, they are already having information so they must accompanied with a person who is having specialization in identifying the substance. Learned counsel also submits that the accused-petitioner is in custody since 06.01.2024 and the trial will take its own time. Therefore, the accused- petitioner may be released on bail. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application. 5. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and also perused the material available on record. 6. As regards the first submission of the counsel for the petitioner, it is to be taken into consideration that it is not possible for the Police team to have an expert from the FSL alongwith them all the time. The Police persons prima-facie, find that the articles seized from the possession of the accused-petitioner which the narcotic drugs then the seizure was prepared and the case was registered and the samples of contraband were sent to the FSL. It is not a case of the accused-petitioner that the samples sent to the FSL are not the narcotic drugs. As regards the delay in trial of the case is concerned, on perusal of the order-sheets of the trial Court placed alongwith the bail application, the Court finds that it is the accused-petitioner also who is accountable for the delay in trial because on 04.12.2024 when the witnesses were present before the Court, counsel for the accused-petitioner filed an application that he was filing the nomination form contesting the election of the bar. On 27.01.2025, the matter was got adjourned on account of change of lawyer. [2025:RJ-JP:16040] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-13257/2024] 7. In view of the aforesaid facts, this Court is not inclined to enlarged the accused-petitioner on bail. 8. Accordingly, the this second bail application is dismissed. (GANESH RAM MEENA),J Ashish Kumar /1