Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 6950 (RAJ)

AMAN KHAN @ MAHMOOD SHAID S/O ABDUL RAFIQ v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CRLMB/2513/2025 · 2025-02-19

Anil Kumar Upman

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:7207] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 2513/2025 Aman Khan @ Mahmood Shaid S/o Abdul Rafiq, Aged About 22 Years, R/o Pathari Mohalla Dug, Police Station Dug, District Jhalawar (Raj.) (Presently Confined In Sub Jail At Bhawani Mandi). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajveer Singh Jhala For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 19/02/2025 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.13/2025 registered at Police Station Dug, District Jhalawar for the offence punishable under Sections 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. Counsel submits that recovered contraband is less than commercial quantity. He submits that co-accused-Akram Khan has been granted benefit of bail by this court. It is further submitted that petitioner has no criminal antecedents and he is in custody since his date of arrest. Trial will take time in its conclusion and [2025:RJ-JP:7207] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-2513/2025] further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by the 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 learned counsel for the petitioner, as also considering the fact that recovered contraband is less than commercial quantity & co- accused Akram Khan has been granted bail by this court; petitioner has no criminal antecedents and trial will take time in its conclusion, 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-petitioner Aman Khan @ Mahmood Shaid S/o Abdul Rafiq, 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 [2025:RJ-JP:7207] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-2513/2025] mark his presence in first 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 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 /55