[2025:RJ-JP:42648] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Second Bail Application No. 13640/2025 1. Suresh S/o Rampratap, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Katsura, P.s Arai, District Ajmer. (At Present Lodged In Sub Jail, Kekri). 2. Kaluram S/o Ramdhan, Aged About 44 Years, R/o Shokali, P.s. Sarana, District Ajmer (Raj.) (At Present Lodged In Sub Jail, Kekri) ----Petitioners Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Jai Prakash Gupta For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 17/10/2025 1. This second bail application under Section 483 of BNSS has been filed on behalf of the petitioners, who have been arrested in connection with FIR No.72/2025 registered at Police Station Sarana, District Ajmer, Rajasthan for offences punishable under Sections 8/15, 8/18 & 8/20 of NDPS Act. 2. The first bail application filed on behalf of the petitioners was dismissed as withdrawn by this court vide order dated 23.09.2025 while giving liberty to file fresh bail application before the learned trial Court after submission of result of investigation. Thereafter, petitioners filed fresh bail application before the learned trial Court which was dismissed vide order dated 09.10.2025. Now, this second bail application has been preferred. [2025:RJ-JP:42648] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-13640/2025] 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that alleged recovered contraband is below commercial quantity thus, provisions of Section 37 of NDPS Act are not applicable in the present matter. Counsel submits that charge-sheet has been filed in this matter. It is contended that trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Counsel submits that petitioners are in custody since 10.08.2025 and further custody of the petitioners would not serve any fruitful purpose. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the prayer for bail made by learned counsel for the petitioners and submits that petitioners are habitual offender as several other cases have been registered against them. 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 learned counsel for the parties, especially considering the fact that alleged recovered contraband is below commercial quantity; trial will take considerable time in its conclusion as well as looking to the period of custody, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it fit and proper to allow the second bail application. 7. This second bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioners (1) Suresh S/o Rampratap & (2) Kaluram S/o Ramdhan shall be released on bail provided each of them furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) together with two sureties in the [2025:RJ-JP:42648] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-13640/2025] 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-petitioners shall not involve in any other offence(s) during currency of the bail and they shall mark their presence in first week of every month in the concerned police station. 9. Concerned SHO shall enter the attendance of the petitioners in the Roznamcha. In case the petitioners fail to mark their presence in the concerned police station, the concerned SHO is directed to immediately report the matter to the concerned Court in this 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 them 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 /19