[2025:RJ-JP:28669] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 1509/2025 Ajay Singh S/o Raghuveer Singh, Aged About 22 Years, R/o Village Rodu, Thana Jaswantgarh, Dist Nagaur At Present Flat No. 427, Samnvyay Asra Road, Thana Bhankrota, Jaipur. (At Present Confined In Central Jail, Jaipur). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP, Jaipur, Rajasthan. ----Respondent Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 1510/2025 Hansraj S/o Kailash Chand, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Village Ringan, Thana Jaswantgarh, Dist. Nagaur, Rajasthan. (At Present Confined In Central Jail, Jaipur). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shivraj Chauhan Mr. Sandeep Singh Nirwan Mr. Shubham Dulor Mr. Vikram Sharma Mr. R.S. Rathore For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP with Mr. Tapesh Agarwal, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 29/07/2025 1. These bail applications under Section 483 of BNSS have been filed on behalf of the petitioners, who have been arrested in connection with FIR No.19/2025 registered at Police Station Bhankrota, Jaipur, for the offence punishable under Section 8/22 of NDPS Act. [2025:RJ-JP:28669] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-1509/2025] 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that the accused-petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel submits that according to the prosecution case petitioners Ajay Singh and Hansraj were found in possession of 10 gram 20 milligram and 6 gram, 6 milligram of contraband (MD) respectively. Counsel submits that the quantity allegedly recovered from Ajay Singh is marginally above commercial quantity. Counsel submits that weight of the packaging material is also included while weighing the contraband and therefore, it cannot be conclusively said that quantity recovered from Ajay Singh is above commercial quantity. Counsel submits that charge- sheet has been filed and perusal of the charge-sheet would reveal that FSL report has not been obtained from the FSL. There are no criminal antecedents against the petitioners. It is contended that trial of the case will take considerable time in its conclusion. Petitioners are in custody since 10.01.2025. Further custody of the petitioners would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. He submits that petitioner Ajay Singh has been found carrying contraband in commercial quantity and thus, looking to the rigour of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, bail should not be granted. 4. I have considered the contentions. 5. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioners and the material available on record in the form of charge-sheet; the quantity of contraband, allegedly [2025:RJ-JP:28669] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-1509/2025] recovered from the possession of the petitioners, which is marginally above the commercial quantity in the case of Ajay Singh; trial will take considerable time in its conclusion and there are no criminal antecedents under NDPS Act against the petitioners, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow the bail application. 6. 6. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioners –Ajay Singh S/o Raghuveer Singh and Hansraj S/o Kailash Chand 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 second 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 [2025:RJ-JP:28669] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-1509/2025] regard. 9. 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 observation made herein above is 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 pcg/41-42