[2025:RJ-JP:39036] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2nd Bail Application No. 11708/2025 Smt Seema Sansi W/o Shri Deepak Sansi, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Sarve Number 221 Water Box Ki Gali, Vedpuri Colony, Ama- gadh, Police Station Transport Nagar, Jaipur (Present Confined In Centre Jail Jaipur). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Girraj Prasad Sharma with Ms. Nikita Sharma Ms. Sneha Gulati For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP with Mr. Gaurav Gupta, Assistant GA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 23/09/2025 1. This second bail application under Section 483 BNSS has been filed on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.110/2025 registered at Police Station Transport Nagar, District Jaipur City (East) (Raj.) for offence punishable under Section 8/21 of NDPS Act. 2. The first bail application filed on behalf of the petitioner was dismissed as withdrawn by this court vide order dated 22.08.2025 while giving liberty to renew the prayer for bail after submission of result of investigation. Now, charge-sheet has been filed thus, this second bail application has been preferred. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It is submitted that no [2025:RJ-JP:39036] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-11708/2025] contraband has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. It is submitted that petitioner has been made accused in this case solely on the basis of interrogation/investigation of co- accused person namely- Ballu Qureshi who was found in possession of contraband (Smack) weighing 12 gram 86 milligram and name of the petitioner surfaced during his interrogation. It is submitted that bail application preferred by the petitioner before the learned trial court was rejected solely on the basis of the fact that six other cases have been registered against the petitioner out of which, four cases are registered under the NDPS Act but these four cases are bailable in nature as contraband allegedly recovered in these cases are in small quantity. It is contended that trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Counsel further contends that petitioner is female and she is in custody since 28.07.2025 and presently, she is carrying pregnancy of three months. Further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner and submits that petitioner is a habitual offender as six other cases have been registered against her out of which, four cases are registered under the NDPS Act. 5. I have considered the contentions. 6. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by both the parties, especially considering the fact that no contraband has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner, as also the fact that petitioner is female and she is carrying pregnancy of [2025:RJ-JP:39036] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-11708/2025] three months 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 proper to allow the second bail application. 7. This second bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner - Smt Seema Sansi W/o Shri Deepak Sansi, shall be released on bail provided she 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 she 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. 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 her presence in the concerned police station in first week of every month, till trial is concluded. 9. Concerned SHO is directed to maintain a register recording the attendance of the petitioner, as directed above. In case the petitioner fails to mark her presence in the concerned police station, as directed above, the concerned SHO is directed to immediately report the matter to the concerned Court in this regard. 10. 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 [2025:RJ-JP:39036] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-11708/2025] trial Court to cancel the bail granted to petitioner by this Court. 11. Office is directed to send 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 GAUTAM JAIN /42