[2025:RJ-JP:6326] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 2188/2025 Rahul Kumar S/o Jabraram, Aged About 20 Years, R/o Village Koja Thana Dorimanna, District Barmer Haal Gitanjali Colony, Shiv Vihar, Manyavas, Mansarover, P.s. Mansarover, District Jaipur. (At Present Confined At Central Jail, Jaipur) ----Petitioner Versus The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Public Prosecutor. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ravinder Kumar Paliwal for Mr. Balram Vashisth For Respondent(s) : Mr. Jai Prakash Tiwari, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 13/02/2025 1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS., on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.45/2025 registered at Police Station Shipra Path, District Jaipur City (South) for the offences punishable under Sections 8/18 & 8/22 of NDPS Act. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel submits that the alleged recovered contraband is below commercial quantity. He submits that co-accused person of this case namely Suresh Vishnoi has been granted bail by this court. Petitioner is in custody since 20.01.2025 & there are no criminal antecedents of similar nature against him. Counsel argues [2025:RJ-JP:6326] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-2188/2025] that trial will take time in its completion. Further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. 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 both the parties, especially the fact that alleged recovered contraband is below commercial quantity & co-accused person of this case has been granted bail by this court; trial of the case will take 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 bail application. 6. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner – Rahul Kumar S/o Jabraram, 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. 7. 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 in first week of every month in the concerned police station. 8. Concerned SHO is directed to maintain a register recording [2025:RJ-JP:6326] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-2188/2025] the attendance of the petitioner, as directed above. 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. 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 hereinabove is only for decision of the instant bail application and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J GAUTAM JAIN /60