[2025:RJ-JP:7815] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 561/2024 Jasveer Singh S/o Shri Balkar Singh, R/o Ammivala, P.S. Dharamkot, Distt. Moga, Punjab. (Petitioner In Central Jail, Ajmer). ----Accused-Petitioner Versus The State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ved Prakash Sogarwal, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Ms. Arti Sharma, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 20/02/2025 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.113/2023 registered at Police Station Nasirabad Sadar, District Ajmer for the offences punishable under Sections 8/15 of NDPS Act. Later on, Police 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 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 the fact that he is registered owner of the vehicle in which contraband was being carried by the co-accused person. Charge-sheet has been filed and trial of the case will take considerable time in its conclusion. Petitioner is in custody since his date of arrest and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. [2025:RJ-JP:7815] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-561/2024] 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. Counsel submits that huge quantity of contraband has been recovered in the instant case and petitioner is registered owner of the vehicle which was being used in transportation of the contraband. Apart from this, three other cases under the NDPS Act have been registered against the petitioner which shows that he is a habitual offender and he is involved in drug trafficking. Thus, looking to the rigour of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, benefit of bail should not be granted to him. 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 both the parties as also looking to the fact that vehicle in question, which is in the name of the petitioner has been found involved in transportation of contraband and three other cases under the NDPS Act have been registered against the petitioner, therefore, this Court cannot record its satisfaction that in case of release on bail in this case, he will not repeat the same offence particularly, when it is apparent from record that during currency of bail in earlier cases which were registered under the NDPS Act, another offence has been committed by him, thus, I do not find it a fit case to allow this bail application. 6. Accordingly, this bail application stands dismissed. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN), J MADAN/13