[2025:RJ-JP:4061] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2nd Bail Application No. 16517/2024 Jitendra Saini S/o Babulal Saini, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Karnimata Ke Mandir Ke Paas, Dudu, Rajasthan. (At Present In Central Jail, Jaipur). ----Petitioner Versus C.b.n., Through Special Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Yunus Khan For Respondent(s) : Mr. Tej Prakash Sharma, Special PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 28/01/2025 1. The instant second application for bail has been filed under Section 483 BNSS., on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.03/2024 registered at Police Station CBN District Jaipur for the offences punishable under Sections 8/22(c) & 8/29 of NDPS Act. 2. The first bail application (No.10936/2024) was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 26.11.2024 with liberty to renew the prayer of bail after filing of result of investigation in the court concerned. Now, charge-sheet has been filed in this matter for the offences punishable under Sections 8/22(c), 25 & 29 of NDPS Act. Thus, this second bail application has been preferred. 3. Learned counsel for the accused petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that petitioner has nothing to do with the alleged recovery. He has [2025:RJ-JP:4061] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-16517/2024] been implicated in this case only on the basis that he is the registered owner of vehicle (Maruti Suzuki Wagon R) No.RJ 42CA 7298, used in the illegal transportation of narcotic substances by the main accused Kaluram Saini. Learned counsel contends that the accused-Kaluram Saini is the relative of the petitioner, therefore, in good faith he gives his aforesaid vehicle to him. He was not aware of the fact that the accused-Kaluram Saini would use this vehicle for such illegal activities. Petitioner is in custody since 25.06.2024 & thus, he is behind the bars for almost seven months. There are no criminal antecedents of the petitioner. Counsel submits that charge-sheet has been filed & trial will take long time in its completion. Further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 4. Learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for NCB opposes the bail application. He submits that huge quantity of contraband have been recovered and thus, considering the rigour of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, bail should not be granted. 5. I have heard and considered the submissions advanced at bar and have gone through the material available on record. 6. The petitioner has already been behind the bars for the last seven months and still trial will take time in its conclusion. Prolonged incarceration, generally militates against the most precious fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and in such a situation, the conditional liberty must override the embargo contained under Section 37 of the NDPS Act. 7. So far as Section 37 of the NDPS Act is concerned, it does [2025:RJ-JP:4061] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-16517/2024] not create an absolute embargo for grant of bail. Further, while considering an application for grant of bail, it is not required for the Court to record positive finding that the accused is not guilty. The only requirement of law is that the Court would look at the material in a broad manner and reasonably see whether the accused's guilt may be proved. The satisfaction which courts are expected to record i.e, the accused may not be guilty is only prima facie, based on a reasonable reading, which does not call for meticulous examination of the material collected during investigation. 8. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the arguments advanced at bar, as also the fact that charge-sheet has been filed & trial of the case will take considerable time in its conclusion; absence of criminal antecedents as well as looking as looking to the custody period, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it just and proper to accept the instant second bail application. 9. Thus, this second application for bail is allowed and it is directed that accused petitioner Jitendra Saini S/o Babulal Saini, arrested in connection with FIR No.03/2024 PS CBN District Jaipur shall be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- 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:4061] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-16517/2024] 10. It is made clear that the accused petitioner shall not involve in any other similar offence during currency of the bail. If 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 him by this Court. 11. The observations 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 GAUTAM JAIN /393