Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 6126 (RAJ)

LOKESH MEENA S/O BHANWAR LAL MEENA v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CRLMB/1894/2025 · 2025-02-10

Praveer Bhatnagar

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:5696] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No.1894/2025 Lokesh Meena S/o Bhanwar Lal Meena, Aged About 22 Years, R/o Village Guradi, Tehsil Police Station Chhipabarod, District Baran, Raj. ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Bhim Singh Meena, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rajesh Chaudhary, GA-cum-AAG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR Order 10/02/2025 1. Apprehending his arrest in connection with FIR No.06/2025, registered at Police Station Vidhayek Puri, Jaipur City (South), for the offence(s) under Sections 8/21 of the N.D.P.S. Act, the accused-petitioner has preferred this criminal misc. bail application under Section 482 of B.N.S.S. 2. Learned counsel for the accused-petitioner submits that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It is contended that apart from the disclosure statement of the other co-accused there is no substantial evidence available on the record indicating the accused-petitioner has supplied the said contraband article to the other co-accused and no transaction was ever made between the petitioner and the other co-accused. The petitioner is ready and willing to co-operate with the investigation, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required, therefore, [2025:RJ-JP:5696] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-1894/2025] the anticipatory bail application of the accused-petitioner may be allowed. 3. Learned GA-cum-AAG has vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application of the accused-petitioner. It is contended that from the other co-accused, the said contraband article was recovered, they have disclosed the name of the accused-petitioner and the accused-petitioner did not appear before the concerned Court and evading the proceedings, therefore, the anticipatory bail application of the accused- petitioner may be dismissed. 4. Heard and perused the material available on the record. 5. Apart from the disclosure statement of the other co-accused there is no substantial evidence available on the record indicating the accused-petitioner has supplied the said contraband article to the other co-accused, without expressing anything on the merits of the case, I deem it just and proper to allow the anticipatory bail application of the accused-petitioner. 6. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of B.N.S.S. is allowed and it is ordered that in the event of arrest of the petitioner- Lokesh Meena S/o Bhanwar Lal Meena, in connection with FIR No.06/2025, registered at Police Station Vidhayek Puri, Jaipur City (South), he shall be enlarged on bail 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 S.H.O/I.O/Arresting Officer of the concerned Police Station on the following conditions:- (i) that the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) that the petitioner shall not directly or [2025:RJ-JP:5696] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-1894/2025] indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the court or any police officer, and (iii) that the petitioner shall not leave India without previous permission of the court. (PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J Ashwani Kr Srivastava /-17