[2025:RJ-JP:8536] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous II Bail Application No. 2558/2025 Rohitash S/o Shri Bhambhuram, R/o Biyawas, Tehsil Viratnagar, District Kotputali-Behror (Raj) (Accused Petitioner Is In Judicial Custody In Sub Jail Kotputali). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Manish Gupta Ms. Shweta Soni For Respondent(s) : Ms. Arti Sharma, PP Mr. N. S. Dhakar, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 25/02/2025 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.107/2024 PS Viratnagar, Kotputli Behror for offences under Sections 8/21 & 8/22 of the NDPS Act. After completion of investigation, police has filed chargesheet for offences under Sections 8/21, 8/22 and 8/29 of the NDPS Act in the court concerned. 2. Vide order dated 28.11.2024, first bail application (No.8631/2024) preferred on behalf of the accused petitioner was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to renew the prayer for bail after recording statement of the seizure officer. Now, the statement of the seizure officer has been recorded at trial and hence, this second bail application. [2025:RJ-JP:8536] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-2558/2025] 3. Shri Manish Gupta, learned counsel representing accused petitioner contends that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He further contends that as per the prosecution case, 10-10 strips (each strip containing 24 capsules) (total 480 capsules) of Acetaeminophen, Tramadol HCI Dicyclomine HCI Capsules (Spasmed) and diclomyne hydrochloride, tramadol, hydrochloride & Acetaminophene (SPAS Tron Plus) capsules respectively were recovered from the possession of the petitioner. The total weight of the recovered capsules including the outer coating (gelcap) is 268.8 grams whereas net weight of the substance contained in those capsules are not taken. Learned counsel submits that PW.1 Manoharlal, in his court testimony, has clearly stated that capsules with their outer layer/coating were weighed and he did not take separate weight of the substance of the capsules and the coatings/gelcaps of the capsules. Learned counsel argues that if the weight of the coatings/gelcaps are excluded from the total weight of the recovered capsules, then, in all probability, the recovery would fall within intermediate quantity as the commercial quantity of Tradmadol Hydrochloride is 250 grams and here in this case, the total weight including weight of the coating/gelcaps, is 268.8 grams which is marginally above the commercial quantity. He submits that the petitioner is in custody since 20.05.2024. He does not have any criminal antecedents under the NDPS Act. Bail application of co-accused persons namely Ramavtar and Surya Pratap Singh have already been accepted and they have been enlarged on bail. Trial will take time long time in its conclusion. [2025:RJ-JP:8536] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-2558/2025] 4. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. It is contended that looking to the quantity of the recovered capsules and its weight, bail should not be granted to the accuse petitioner. 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 learned counsel for the parties, as also the total weight of the recovered capsules including the weight of the gelcaps (outer cover of capsules), which upon excluded would prima facie, bring the recovery either in intermediate or marginally above the commercial quantity; co-accused have been granted bail by this Court; trial will take considerable time in its conclusion and absence of criminal antecedents but without commenting anything on merits and demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow this bail application. 7. This second bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner Rohitash S/o Shri Bhambhuram, 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. The petitioner shall not involve in similar offences during currency of bail and shall mark his presence in the local police station where he is presently residing in the second week of every month till conclusion of trial. Breach of any of these two conditions [2025:RJ-JP:8536] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-2558/2025] shall alone be a reason for the trial court to cancel the bail granted to him. 9. The concerned SHO is directed to maintain a register recording his presence. In case the petitioner fails to mark his presence, as stated above, the concerned SHO is directed to intimate the matter to the concerned court forthwith. 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 LALIT MOHAN /752