[2025:RJ-JP:39910] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 12420/2025 Jitendra Kumar Sharma S/o Shri Ramkishor Sharma, Aged About 45 Years, R/o 178, Golden Park, Paldi Meena, Police Station Jam- doli, District Jaipur (Raj.) (At Present Confined In Central Jail, Jaipur). ----Petitioner Versus The State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 12421/2025 Ramray Sharma S/o Shri Kailash Chand Sharma, Aged About 37 Years, R/o- Tiwari Mohalla, Police Station Andhi, District Jaipur. (At Present Confined In Central Jail Ghatgate Jaipur). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Avtar Singh Rathore Mr. Vaibhav Pancholi For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP with Mr. Gaurav Gupta, Asstt. G.A. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 26/09/2025 1. These bail applications have been filed under Section 483 of BNSS on behalf of the petitioners, who have been arrested in connection with FIR No.42/2025 registered at Police Station Andhi, District Jaipur Rural for offences under Sections 8/21 and 8/22 of NDPS Act. After completion of investigation, police filed charge- [2025:RJ-JP:39910] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-12420/2025] sheet in this matter for the offences punishable under Sections 8/21, 8/22 & 8/29 of NDPS Act. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that the accused-petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. It is submitted that admittedly, no contraband has been recovered from the possession of the petitioners. It is submitted that co- accused, who is juvenile, was found in possession of Tramadol capsules. It is contended that said juvenile has been granted benefit of bail by Children’s Court under Section 12 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. It is contended that there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioners of similar nature and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. It is argued that petitioners are in custody since their date of arrest and further custody of the petitioners would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioners. He submits that co-accused who is juvenile was found in possession of commercial quantity of contraband. It is submitted that petitioners are key persons who supplied the drugs through juvenile. 4. I have considered the contentions. 5. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the argument advanced by learned counsel for the petitioners, especially considering the fact that no contraband has been recovered from the possession of petitioners, so also the fact that there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioners of similar nature and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion, but without commenting anything on the [2025:RJ-JP:39910] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-12420/2025] merits/demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow these bail applications. 6. These bail applications are accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioners (1) Jitendra Kumar Sharma S/o Shri Ramkishor Sharma & (2) Ramray Sharma S/o Shri Kailash Chand Sharma, 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 sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court with the stipulation that they 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. 7. 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, till trial is concluded. 8. Concerned SHO is directed to maintain a register recording the attendance of the petitioners, as directed above. In case the petitioners fail to mark their 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. 9. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the concerned SHO for necessary compliance. 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. [2025:RJ-JP:39910] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-12420/2025] 11. The observations made hereinabove are only for decision of these bail applications and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J LALIT MOHAN /323-324