[2025:RJ-JP:9667] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No.12320/2024 Seesa Apanna S/o Ghasi Apanna, R/o Munchigiputt District Alluri Sitaraman Raju (Andhra Pradesh) (At Present Lodge At District Jail, District Sawai Madhopur). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 14325/2024 Samar Pandit S/o Chandra Shekhar, Aged About 47 Years, R/o Bandipur Shyamraytla, Police Station Haripal, District Hugli (West Bengal) (At Present Confined In District Jail, Sawai Madhopur). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ashindra Gautam, Adv. Mr. Girish Khandelwal, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shree Ram Dhakar, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR Order 05/03/2025 1. These instant bail applications have been filed under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. on behalf of accused-petitioners. The accused- petitioners have been arrested in connection with FIR No.135/2024, registered at Police Station Rawanjana Doongar, District Sawai Madhopur, for the offence(s) under Sections 8/20 of the N.D.P.S. Act. [2025:RJ-JP:9667] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-12320/2024] 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the accused- petitioner-Seesa Apanna has falsely been implicated in this case. It is argued that apart from the disclosure statement of the other co-accused Subhas, there are no other substantive evidence available on record that the petitioner has supplied the contraband articles containing weight of 567.350 Kg of Ganja and the said contraband article was recovered from the other co-accused namely, Rahul, Subhas, Moti Singh, Lallan and Nilesh. No recovery was effected from the possession of petitioner-Seesa Apanna and there is no connectivity established of the accused petitioner with the other co-accused through mobile phone or any other mode. The charge-sheet has already been submitted and the statement of the co-accused is inadmissible in evidence. The petitioner- Seessa Apanna is in custody since 06.10.2024 and the trial of the case may take considerable time, therefore, the bail application of the accused-petitioner-Seesa Apanna may be allowed. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner-Samar Pandit in pursuant to the notice served upon him appeared before the Investigating Agency and stated the fact that the vehicle in which contraband article was being transported, was handed over to the other co-accused Raj Kumar Goswami. The vehicle bearing No.WB-15D-8669 is not a transport vehicle and the accused-petitioner-Samar Pandit was not aware about the fact that co-accused Raj Kumar Goswami was carrying the contraband articles in the said truck. There are no call details transpired between the petitioner and the other co-accused, who were transporting the contraband articles in the said truck. There are no criminal history against the petitioner-Samar Pandit. The [2025:RJ-JP:9667] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-12320/2024] petitioner-Samar Pandit is behind the bars since 28.10.2024 and charge-sheet has already been produced, further trial of the case may take considerable time, therefore, the bail application of the accused-petitioner-Samar Pandit may also be allowed. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the grant of bail applications. It is contended that the quantity recovered from the vehicle bearing No.WB-15D-8669 is commercial quantity. The investigation has revealed that the petitioner-Seesa Apanna supplied the said contraband articles to the other co-accused, who were nabbed at the place of occurrence by the police. Similarly, after investigation it was revealed that the petitioner-Samar Pandit has failed to show that how the transport vehicle was handed over to the other co-accused. Thus, considering the rider imposed under Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act, the bail applications of both the petitioners may be dismissed. 5. Heard and perused the material available on the record. 6. As far as petitioner-Seesa Apanna is concerned the other co- accused Subhash has named him in the disclosure statement rendered under Section 23(2) of BSA. The petitioner was arrested solely on the basis of the disclosure statement and no recovery of any contraband article was found from the possession of the petitioner-Seesa Apanna. Apart from the disclosure statement of the other co-accused, there are no other substantive evidence available on record, which shows that the petitioner has supplied the said contraband articles to the other co-accused Subhash Thapa. Likewise, against the other petitioner-Samar Pandit there are no substantive evidence available on record, apart from the fact that the petitioner is registered owner of the said vehicle, no [2025:RJ-JP:9667] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-12320/2024] connectivity through mobile phone or any other mode between the parties was established between the petitioner and the other co- accused from whose possession the said contraband articles were recovered in the vehicle No.WB-15D-8669. There are no criminal history against the accused petitioner-Samar Pandit, therefore, there are no reasonable possibility of accused petitioners be involved in the alleged crime, hence, the bail applications of both the petitioners are hereby allowed. 7. Accordingly, these bail applications under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. are allowed and it is ordered that the accused- petitioners- 1. Seesa Apanna S/o Ghasi Apanna and 2. Samar Pandit S/o Chandra Shekhar, in connection with FIR No.135/2024, registered at Police Station Rawanjana Doongar, District Sawai Madhopur, shall be enlarged on bail provided both of them furnish a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for their appearance before the Court concerned on all the dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. (PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J Ashwani Kr Srivastava /-33-34