RAHUL SINGH S/O SHRI LATE ARJUN SINGH v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
CRLMB/14288/2024 · 2025-01-06
Anil Kumar Upman
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 33077 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 33077 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 14288/2024 Rahul Singh S/o Shri Late Arjun Singh, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Dhamniya, Police Station Suhasara, District Mandsore (M.p.) (Presently Confined In District Jail Kota). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pawan Kumar Verma For Respondent(s) : Ms. Arti Sharma, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN
Order 06/01/2025
1. This 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.181/2024 registered at Police Station Bhimganjmandi, District Kota City for the offences punishable under Sections 8/15 of NDPS Act. After completion of investigation, Police has filed charge-sheet in this matter.
2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been made accused in this case solely on the basis of interrogation of co-accused persons namely Kamal Singh and Hardeep Singh who were found in possession of contraband of poppy husk being 21.600 kg. Counsel further submits that co-accused persons have been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 20.12.2024.
(2 of 3) [CRLMB-14288/2024]
Learned counsel contend that charge-sheet has been filed, there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioner and trial of the case will take considerable time. Learned counsel further contend that further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose.
3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by
learned counsel for the petitioner. He submits that 3 other cases have been registered against the petitioner. However, he fairly concedes that none of the case is registered under NDPS Act. 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 the fact that co-accused persons who were found in possession of contraband have already been granted bail by this Court; charge-sheet has been filed; he does not have any criminal antecedents under the NDPS Act and trial will take 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 bail application. 6. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner Rahul Singh S/o Shri Late Arjun Singh 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
(3 of 3) [CRLMB-14288/2024] Court to which the matter is transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. 7. However, it is made clear that the petitioner shall not involve in similar offence(s) during currency of bail granted by this Court. The petitioner is further directed to mark his presence in the concerned police station on first week of every month, till trial is concluded. Concerned SHO is directed to maintain a register recording the attendance of the petitioner, as directed above. In case the petitioner fail to mark his presence in the concerned police station, as directed above, the concerned SHO is directed to immediately report the matter to the concerned Court in this regard. 8. If breach of any 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 petitioner by this Court. 9. The observation made hereinabove is only for decision of these instant bail application and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner.
(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J ANAND TANWAR /54