[2025:RJ-JP:7405] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 13876/2024 Nawal Kishore Lavvanshi S/o Ganpat Lavvanshi, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Ward No. 4, Near Hanuman Mandir, Saikud, Police Station Sarthal, District Baran. (Accused Petitioner Confined In Central Jail Kota) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mukesh Pal Jadoun Mr. Anuraj Chahar Mr. Saurabh Tripathi For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 19/02/2025 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.234/2024 registered at Police Station Sangod, District Kota Rural for the offence punishable under Section 8/15 of NDPS Act. Later on, police has filed charge-sheet for the offence punishable under Section 8/29 of NDPS Act against the accused-petitioner in the court concerned. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submit that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It is submitted that petitioner has been made accused solely on the basis of police interrogation of co-accused. Learned counsel contend that admittedly, no contraband has been recovered from the possession of the [2025:RJ-JP:7405] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-13876/2024] petitioner. It is contended that interrogation of co-accused cannot be used against the petitioner as the same is hit by Section 25 of Indian Evidence Act. Learned counsel place reliance upon the judgment rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Tofan Singh Vs. State of Tamil Nadu reported in AIR 2020 SC 5592. Further reliance is placed upon order dated 10.01.2025 passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s).16671/2024 (Shambhulal Gurjar @ Rohit vs. State of Rajasthan) wherein facility of bail was granted to the accused considering the fact that the accused was in custody from 20 months and three other cases were registered against him under the NDPS Act in the years 2019, 2021 & 2022. Learned counsel argue that petitioner is in custody since 30.08.2024. Further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. Charge-sheet has been filed and trial will take time in its conclusion. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. He submits that one other case under the NDPS Act has been registered against the petitioner and matter pertains to commercial quantity, therefore, looking to the rigour of Section 37 of NDPS Act, bail should not be granted to the petitioner. 4. I have considered the contentions. 5. So far as rigour of Section 37 of the NDPS Act is concerned, it does not create an absolute embargo for grant of bail. Further, while considering an application for grant of bail, it is not required for the Court to record positive finding that the accused is not [2025:RJ-JP:7405] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-13876/2024] guilty. The only requirement of law is that the Court would look at the material in a broad manner and reasonably see whether the accused's guilt may be proved. The satisfaction which courts are expected to record i.e, the accused may not be guilty is only prima facie, based on a reasonable reading, which does not call for meticulous examination of the material collected during investigation. 6. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, especially the fact that admittedly, no contraband has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner; charge- sheet has been filed and trial will take time in its conclusion, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it fit and proper to allow these bail applications. 7. The bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner Nawal Kishore Lavvanshi S/o Ganpat Lavvanshi, shall be released on bail provided he 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 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. 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 first week of every month in the concerned police station. [2025:RJ-JP:7405] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-13876/2024] 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. 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. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN), J CHARU SONI /75