[2025:RJ-JP:42123] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2nd Bail Application No. 13052/2025 Bajrang Lal S/o Ambalal, Aged About 34 Years, Resident Of Topa, Police Station Shahpura, District Bhilwara ( Presently Confined In District Jail At Tonk) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shubham Saini Mr. Meghraj Meena for Mr. Rajender Singh Tanwar For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP with Mr. Gaurav Gupta, Assistant GA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 15/10/2025 1. This second bail application under Section 483 of BNSS has been filed, on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.89/2023 registered at Police Station Duni, District Tonk (Raj.) for offence punishable under Section 8/15 of the NDPS Act. 2. The first bail application filed on behalf of the petitioner was dismissed as withdrawn by this Court vide order dated 18.09.2025 while giving liberty to renew the prayer for bail after submission of result of investigation. Now, charge-sheet has been filed against the petitioner for offences punishable under Sections 8/15 and 8/29 of the NDPS Act thus, this second bail application has been preferred. 3. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It is submitted that no contraband has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. It is submitted that petitioner has been [2025:RJ-JP:42123] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-13052/2025] made accused in this case solely on the basis of interrogation/investigation of co-accused person namely- Shankar Lal who was found in possession of contraband (Poppy Husk) weighing 23kgs and 250grams. It is submitted that alleged recovered contraband is less than commercial quantity. It is submitted that aforementioned co-accused person has already been granted benefit of bail by Co-ordinate bench of this Court. It is submitted that trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Counsel submits that petitioner is in custody since 20.07.2025 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that petitioner is a habitual offender as 15 other cases have been registered against him, out of which, 2 cases are registered under the NDPS Act. 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 both the parties, especially considering the fact that no contraband has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner, as also considering the fact that aforementioned co-accused person who was found in possession of the contraband has already been granted benefit of bail by the Co-ordinate bench of this Court and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion as well as looking to the custody period, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow the second bail application. 7. This second bail application is accordingly allowed and it is [2025:RJ-JP:42123] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-13052/2025] directed that accused-petitioner - Bajrang Lal S/o Ambalal, 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 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-petitioner shall not involve in any other offence(s) during currency of the bail and he shall mark his presence every week in the concerned police station, till trial is concluded. 9. Concerned SHO shall enter the attendance of the petitioner in the Roznamcha. In case the petitioner fails to mark his 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. 10. If breach of any 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. 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 GAUTAM JAIN /17