[2025:RJ-JP:9054] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 2873/2025 Dharmendra @ Gourav S/o Shri Girdharilal, R/o Beelwadi, Tehsil Viratnagar, District Kotputali- Behrod (Raj.) (At Present Confined In District Jail Kotputali). ----Accused-Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. B.M. Gurjar, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Ms. Arti Sharma, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 03/03/2025 1. This bail application under Section 483 of BNSS has been filed on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.108/2024 registered at Police Station Viratnagar, Kotputli-Behror for offences punishable under Sections 8/21 & 8/22 of the NDPS Act. After completion of investigation, police has filed charge-sheet for offences punishable under Sections 8/21, 8/22 and 8/29 of the NDPS Act in the court concerned. 2. Learned counsel for the accused-petitioner contends that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He further contends that as per the prosecution case, 15 strips (each strip containing 24 capsules) (total 360 capsules) of Aceptaminophen, Tramadol HCI Dicyclomine HCI Capsules (Spasmed) and 05 strips (each strip containing 24 capsules) (total 120 capsules) of Dicyclomine Hydrochloride, Tramadol, [2025:RJ-JP:9054] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-2873/2025] Hydrochloride Aceptaminophen (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 261.6 grams whereas there is no evidence available on record showing net weight of the substance contained in those capsules. The capsules with their outer layer/coating were weighed and no separate weight of the substance of the capsules and the coatings/gelcaps of the capsules were taken. 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 261.6 grams which is marginally above the commercial quantity. He submits that the petitioner is in custody since 20.10.2024. He does not have any criminal antecedents. Trial will take time long time in its conclusion and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. 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. 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 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 [2025:RJ-JP:9054] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-2873/2025] intermediate or marginally above the commercial quantity; 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. 6. 6. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner- Dharmendra @ Gourav S/o Shri Girdharilal 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. 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 shall alone be a reason for the trial court to cancel the bail granted to him. 8. 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. 9. 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 MADAN/41