NITESH SONI S/O BAJRANGLAL SONI v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
CRLMB/609/2025 · 2025-01-29
Anil Kumar Upman
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 3322 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 3322 (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. 609/2025 Nitesh Soni S/o Bajranglal Soni, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Ajad Chowk, Badhal, Police Station Kishangarh Renwal District Jaipur, Presently Chetna Medical Store, Ajad Chowk, Badhal, Police Station Renwal District Jaipur Rural. At Present In Sub Jail, Sambharlake. ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Biri Singh Sinsinwar, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Mohan Lal For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN
Order 29/01/2025
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.381/2024 registered at Police Station Renwal, District Jaipur Rural for the offences punishable under Sections 8/21 & 8/22 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 for the petitioner submits that admittedly alleged recovered contraband is below commercial quantity. Counsel further submits that petitioner is in custody since 19.12.2024. There are no criminal antecedents of the petitioner and trial of the case will take considerable time. Learned counsel further contend
(2 of 3) [CRLMB-609/2025] 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.
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 alleged recovered contraband is below commercial quantity; there are no criminal antecedents 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 Nitesh Soni S/o Bajranglal Soni 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.
7. 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, till trial is concluded.
(3 of 3) [CRLMB-609/2025]
8. If breach of this condition 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 the petitioner by this Court.
9. The observation made hereinabove is 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 ANAND TANWAR /188