Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 35406 (RAJ)

MAHENDRA PAL S/O MOHARI LAL v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CRLMB/16274/2024 · 2025-01-07

Anil Kumar Upman

Public Interest Litigationbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:980] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 16274/2024 Mahendra Pal S/o Mohari Lal, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Barwada-Fatehgarh, Police Station Samod, District Jaipur. (Presently Confined At Central Jail, Jaipur). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kapil Gupta For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Kumar Gupta, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 07/01/2025 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.234/2024 registered at Police Station Amarsar, District Jaipur Gramin for the offences punishable under Sections 8/21 & 8/22 of NDPS Act and Sections 19/54 of Rajasthan Excise Act. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that alleged recovered quantity of tablets is admittedly below commercial quantity. It is further submitted that petitioner has no criminal antecedents and he is in custody since 10.12.2024. Charge-sheet has been filed, trial will take time in its [2025:RJ-JP:980] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-16274/2024] conclusion and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by the 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 quantity of tablets is below commercial quantity; petitioner has no criminal antecedents 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 the bail application. 6. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner Mahendra Pal S/o Mohari Lal, 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. [2025:RJ-JP:980] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-16274/2024] 7. [2025:RJ-JP:980] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-16274/2024] 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 in the first week of every month, till trial is concluded. 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. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN), J CHARU SONI /364