HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 15251/2024 Ramavtar S/o Shri Ramjilal, R/o Dhani Gaskan, Police Station Bhabru, District Kotputli-Behror. (At Present In Sub Jail Kotputli, District Kotputli-Behror). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ashish Chauhan For Respondent(s) : Ms. Arti Sharma, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 06/01/2025 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.107/2024 registered at Police Station Virat Nagar, District Kotputli Behror for offence punishable under Sections 8, 21 and 22 of the 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 submits that admittedly, no contraband has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner and he has been made accused in this case solely on the basis of interrogation/investigation of co-accused person. The petitioner is in custody since 04.11.2024. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet has been filed in this matter and trial of the case will take considerable time. It is contended that further custody of the (2 of 3) [CRLMB-15251/2024] petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. It is also contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the FIR (No.108/2024 PS Virat Nagar), was registered against the petitioner on the very same day of registration of the present FIR and in that FIR also, no recovered of contraband has been effected from the possession of the petitioner and he has been made accused with the aid of Section 29 of the NDPS Act. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail application. He submits that one other case under NDPS Act is also pending against the petitioner. However, he concedes that in that case, no recovery of contraband was effected from 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 no contraband has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner, he has been made accused in this case solely on the basis of interrogation/investigation of co-accused person, charge-sheet has been filed and trial will take in its conclusion but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow the bail application. 6. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner Ramavtar S/o Shri Ramjilal 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 they shall appear before that Court and any court (3 of 3) [CRLMB-15251/2024] to which the matter is transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. 7. 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 on first monday of every month in the concerned police station. 8. 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. 09. The SHO concerned is directed to maintain a register recording attendance of the accused, as mentioned above. In case, the petitioner fails to mark his attendance as mentioned above, the SHO shall intimate the trial court immediately. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J ANAND TANWAR /57