[2025:RJ-JD:4524] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2nd Bail Application No. 11186/2024 Harpreet Singh S/o Shri Sahab Singh, Aged About 21 Years, R/o Kohali P.s., Lopoke, Tehsil Ajnala, Dist. Amrtsar, Punjab (Lodged In Central Jail, Bikaner) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2nd Bail Application No. 11188/2024 Sandeep Singh S/o Shri Jangeer Singh, Aged About 30 Years, R/ o Kohali P.s. Lopoke, Tehsil Ajnala, Dist. Amrtsar, Punjab (Lodged In Central Jail, Bikaner) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Manish Dadhich. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Urja Ram Kalbi, PP. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR Order 23/01/2025 These second applications for bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. have been filed by the petitioners who have been arrested in connection with FIR No.83/2023 registered at Police Station Nal, District Bikaner, for offences under Sections 8/15, 18 and 25 of the NDPS Act. Learned counsel submitted that as per the prosecution, during routine patrolling, on 02.04.2023, a team of Police Station [2025:RJ-JD:4524] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-11186/2024] Nal, District Bikaner recovered contraband (poppy husk/straw) weighing 80.100 kgs. and opium milk weighing 500 gms. from the petitioners. They were arrested on the spot. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioners are in judicial custody since 02.04.2023. He further submitted that out of total 15 cited prosecution witnesses, only 1 prosecution witness has been examined before competent Criminal Court. He further submitted that the delay in trial is not at all attributable to the petitioners. He submitted that the petitioners are in judicial custody since last more than 1 years 9 months and looking to the pace at which trial is being conducted against the present petitioners, the same is not likely to be concluded in near future. Learned counsel submitted that no case of similar nature is pending against the petitioners. In support of their contention, learned counsel for the petitioners placed reliance on the cases of Rabi Prakash Vs. State of Orisa (Leave to Appeal (Criminal) No.4169/2023 and Mohd Muslim @ Hussain Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) in Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No(s).915 of 2023. On these grounds, he implored the Court to enlarge the petitioners on bail. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail applications and submitted that petitioners are facing trial for the offence under the NDPS Act and, therefore, the present bail applications deserve to be rejected straightway. Learned Public Prosecutor, however, was not in position to refute the fact that in last more than 1 years 9 months, out of total 15 [2025:RJ-JD:4524] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-11186/2024] cited prosecution witnesses, only 1 witness has been examined till date. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record. Having considered the rival submissions, facts and circumstances of the case and considering the fact that the petitioners have suffered incarceration for last more than 1 years 9 months and out of total 15 cited prosecution witnesses, only 1 witness has been examined till date, without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the bail applications filed by the petitioners deserve to be accepted. Accordingly, these second bail applications under Section 439 Cr.P.C. are allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioners- (1) Harpreet Singh S/o Shri Sahab Singh and (2) Sandeep Singh S/o Shri Jangeer Singh shall be enlarged on bail in connection with FIR No.83/2023 registered at Police Station Nal, District Bikaner, provided each of them furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for their appearance before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing as and when called upon to so. In case, the petitioners remain absent on any date of hearing or makes an attempt to delay the trial by seeking unnecessary adjournments, it shall be taken as a misuse of concession of bail granted to them by this Court. The prosecution, in such a situation, shall be at liberty to move [2025:RJ-JD:4524] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-11186/2024] an application seeking cancellation of bail granted to the petitioners today by this Court. It is however, made clear that findings recorded/observations made above are for limited purposes of adjudication of bail application. The trial court shall not get prejudiced by the same. A copy of this order be placed in each file. (KULDEEP MATHUR),J 151-152--Tikam/-