[2025:RJ-JP:42371] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Fourth Bail Application No. 13540/2025 Rajesh Jangid S/o Late Shri Babulal Jangid, Aged About 43 Years, R/o Near The Old Neelam School, Tuleda Road Bypass, Police Station N.e.b., District Alwar, (Raj.) (At Present Lodge At District Jail Alwar, District Alwar (Raj.) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sudhir Yadav For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 16/10/2025 1. This fourth bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.68/2023 registered at Police Station Vaishali Nagar, District Alwar (Rajasthan) for offences punishable under Sections 8/20 & 8/29 of NDPS Act. After completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet in this matter. 2. The previous bail applications preferred on behalf of the petitioner were dismissed vide orders dated 30.11.2023, 26.04.2024 & 26.11.2024. Now, this fourth bail application has been preferred. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that according to the prosecution case, alleged contraband ‘Ganja’ weighing [2025:RJ-JP:42371] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-13540/2025] 20.950 kgs was recovered from the possession of the petitioner and co-accused person. Counsel submits that alleged recovered contraband is marginally above the commercial quantity. Counsel submits that there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioner and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. It is submitted that Hon’ble Supreme Court has taken the view in the matter of Devendra Kumar Mishra @ Bade Guru vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.14639/2023 that on the ground of period of incarceration suffered by accused, bail application under the NDPS Act can be considered for grant. Further reliance has been placed upon the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Shambhulal Gurjar @ Rohit vs. State of Rajasthan in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.16671/2024 wherein after taking note of the fact that three other cases under the NDPS Act have been registered against the petitioner, facility of bail was granted to the accused considering the period of incarceration. Counsel contends that petitioner is in custody since 11.10.2023 and as such, he has suffered incarceration of about two years. Further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the prayer for bail made by learned counsel for the petitioner. He submits that commercial quantity of contraband has been recovered in this matter therefore, considering the rigour of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, benefit of bail should not be granted to the petitioner. 5. I have considered the contentions. 6. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of [2025:RJ-JP:42371] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-13540/2025] the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, especially considering the observations made by Hon’ble Apex Court in different cases wherein after considering the period of custody, benefit of bail has been extended to the accused- petitioners, as also considering the fact that there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioner and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion as well as looking to the custody period, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it fit and proper to allow this fourth bail application. 7. This fourth bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner -Rajesh Jangid S/o Late Shri Babulal Jangid 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. 8. 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 in first week of every month in the concerned police station. 9. Concerned SHO shall record the presence of the petitioner in the Roznamcha. In case the petitioner fails to mark his presence in the concerned police station, the concerned SHO is directed to immediately report the matter to the concerned Court in this [2025:RJ-JP:42371] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-13540/2025] regard. 10. 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. 11. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the concerned SHO for necessary compliance. 12. The observations made hereinabove are only for decision of the bail application and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J LALIT MOHAN /13