[2025:RJ-JP:3332] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 3rd Bail Application No. 997/2025 Hariram Sharma S/o Shri Umrao Lal Sharma, Aged About 46 Years, R/o Kakra Dhulkot, Tan Luhakana, Ps Bhamru, District Kotputali Behrod (Raj.) (Accused Petitioner Is In Judicial Custody In Jail Kotputli Behrod). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Manish Gupta For Respondent(s) : Ms. Arti Sharma, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 23/01/2025 1. The instant third application for bail has been filed under Section 483 BNSS., on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.561/2023 registered at Police Station Pragpura District Kotputali Behrod for the offence punishable under Section 8/15 of the NDPS Act. 2. Learned counsel for the accused petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submit that according to the prosecution case, petitioner was carrying six bags of contraband. He submits that the entire bags were seized at the place of recovery. Thereafter, inventory was prepared. According to the inventory, weight of contraband was 51.750 Kgs including the packing material. It is also evident from the charge- sheet that separate weight of packing material has not been [2025:RJ-JP:3332] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-997/2025] taken. In these circumstances, possibility cannot be ruled out that alleged recovered contraband was below commercial quantity. It is submitted that alleged recovered contraband is marginally above from the commercial quantity. Petitioner is in custody since 15.10.2023 & thus, he is behind the bars for almost 15 months. There are no criminal antecedents of the petitioner. Counsel submits that trial will take long time in its completion. Further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail application. She submits that huge quantity of contraband have been recovered from the petitioner and thus, considering the rigour of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, bail should not be granted. 4. I have heard and considered the submissions advanced at bar and have gone through the material available on record. 5. The petitioner has already served sentence of almost 15 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. Prima facie, the recovered contraband is marginally above from the commercial quantity. As per the prosecution case, separate weight of the packing material was not taken. 6. So far as Section 37 of the NDPS Act is concerned, it does 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. [2025:RJ-JP:3332] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-997/2025] 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. 7. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the arguments advanced at bar, especially the fact that alleged recovered quantity is marginally above from the commercial quantity, 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 third bail application. 8. Thus, this third application for bail is allowed and it is directed that accused petitioner Hariram Sharma S/o Shri Umrao Lal Sharma, arrested in connection with FIR No.561/2023 PS Pragpura District Kotputali Behrod 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. 9. It is made clear that the accused petitioner shall not involve in any other similar offence during currency of the bail and during [2025:RJ-JP:3332] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-997/2025] trial, he shall mark his presence on first week of every month in the concerned police station. 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. 10. 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 /228