Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 43148 (RAJ)

MANGILAL MEENA S/O LATE SHRI NANNOORAM MEENA v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CRLMB/15521/2025 · 2025-12-08

Pramil Kumar Mathur

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:49777] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 15521/2025 Mangilal Meena S/o Late Shri Nannooram Meena, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Devrimundh, Police Station Harnawadashahji, District Baran, Rajasthan. (At Present Confined In Sub Jail Chhabra, District Baran). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Jagdish Nagar For Respondent(s) : Mr. Jaiprakash Tiwari, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR Order 08/12/2025 1. The petitioner has filed this bail application under Section 483 of BNSS in FIR No.0088/2025 registered at Police Station Harnavda Shahji, District Baran for offence under Sections 8/21, 25 of NDPS Act. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor and perused the material available on record. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that nothing has been found from the possession of the present petitioner. He argues that co-accused Radheyshyam against whom recovery has been affected has been enlarged on bail by Co- ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 21.07.2025. He further submitted that involved contraband is weighing 101.20 gm Smack which is below the commercial quantity. Though two cases [2025:RJ-JP:49777] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-15521/2025] of different nature have been reported to be pending against the petitioner but in both cases, petitioner has been enlarged on bail. Petitioner is behind the bars since 01.11.2025. No custodial interrogation is required. The trial of the case will take considerable time, therefore, no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in further custody and the bail application of the petitioner may be allowed. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application. 5. On consideration of the rival submissions and material available on record and in the light of submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner but without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of the case, I am inclined to grant benefit of bail to the petitioner. 6. Consequently, the bail application under Section 483 B.N.S.S. is allowed and it is directed that the petitioner Mangilal Meena S/o Late Shri Nannooram Meena, 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 on all subsequent dates of hearing till conclusion of the trial. (PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUIR),J Chandan/131