[2025:RJ-JP:39763] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 12423/2025 Mangilal Son Of Jagnath, Aged About 50 Years, Resident Of Ramji Ke Mandir Ke Pass, Village Mahua Kho, Panchayat- Gopalpura, Police Station Aklera, District Jhalawar (Raj.). (At Present Accused Confined In District Jail, Kota) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Nirmal Kumar Sharma 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. This bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.91/2024 registered at Police Station Ranpur, District Kota City (Rajasthan) for offences punishable under Sections 8/15 & 8/18 of NDPS Act. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that no contraband has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner and he has been made accused in this case solely on the basis of police interrogation of the co-accused persons who were found in possession of the contraband. Counsel submits that said co-accused persons have already been granted benefit of bail by learned trial Court. It is contended that trial will take [2025:RJ-JP:39763] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-12423/2025] considerable time in its conclusion. Counsel submits that petitioner is in custody since 14.09.2025 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner and submits that four other cases have been registered against the petitioner out of which one case is registered under the NDPS Act. 4. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in that one case, he has been acquitted by the learned trial Court. 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 petitioner, especially considering the fact that no contraband has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner, as also the fact that co-accused persons who were found in possession of the contraband have already been granted benefit of bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court and 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 bail application. 7. The bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner- Mangilal Son Of Jagnath 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 [2025:RJ-JP:39763] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-12423/2025] 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. 8. 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 /82