[2025:RJ-JP:11509] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 2959/2025 Kanwarlal S/o Gulab Chand, R/o Kohra Banjari, District Baran, Rajatshan. ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Nirmal Kumar Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shree Ram Dhakar, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR Order 12/03/2025 1. Apprehending his arrest in connection with FIR No. 840/2024 registered at Police Station Shivdaspura, District Jaipur City(South) for the offence(s) under Section 8/21 of NDPS Act, the petitioner has preferred this anticipatory bail application under Section 482 BNSS. 2. Learned counsel for the accused-petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case solely on the basis of statement of other co-accused. It is also contended that there is no criminal antecedents against the petitioner and custodial investigation of the accused petitioner is not required. Petitioner is ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation, therefore, the anticipatory bail of accused-petitioner may be allowed. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes the anticipatory bail application and submits that factual report, same [2025:RJ-JP:11509] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-2959/2025] is taken on record. It is contended that the petitioner was in contact with the other co-accused Pawan Meena and Neeraj Meena through mobile phone and several chats transpired between the petitioner and other co-accused. Investigation also reveals that mobile no. ******6744 is being used by the petitioner and his bank account maintained at SBI Bank branch Chipabardod is also linked with the said mobile number. Other co-accused have not mentioned the name of petitioner rather they have stated that they received the smack from the person who uses the mobile No. ******6744, therefore his anticipatory bail application deserves to be dismissed. 4. I have considered the overall allegations leveled in the FIR and contentions made by the counsel for the parties. 5. Considering the fact that co-accused have not mentioned the name of petitioner rather the co-accused during investigation have stated that they received the smack from the person who uses the mobile No. ******6744, and bank account of petitioner maintained at SBI bank branch Chipabardod is linked with the said mobile number, therefore, considering the above facts this court is not inclined to enlarged the accused petitioner on anticipatory bail. 6. Accordingly, instant anticipatory bail application preferred by the accused-petitioner is hereby dismissed. (PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J ashu /44