[2026:RJ-JP:1162] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 11407/2025 Sunil Kumar S/o Sh. Jaypal, R/o Village Puthi, Police Station Kila Parikshitgarh, District Meerut, Uttar Pradesh. (Presently Confined In The Jail ) ----Petitioner Versus The State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 12813/2025 Anuj Alias Bhola S/o Shri Ravindra, R/o Gram Datiyana, Thana Chapar, District Muzaffarnagar, Uttar Pradesh. (At Present Confined In Central Jail Alwar). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rahul Tyagi, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Punia, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 09/01/2026 1. These bail applications have been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, on behalf of the petitioners, who have been arrested in connection with FIR No.351/2024 registered at Police Station Neemrana, District Kotputli-Behror for offences punishable under Section 8/20 of the NDPS Act. After completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet in this case. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that the accused-petitioners are innocent and they have falsely been [2026:RJ-JP:1162] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-11407/2025] implicated in this case. Counsel further submits that charge-sheet has been filed and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Counsel submits that the petitioners are in custody since 24.10.2024, thus, further custody of the petitioners would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by the counsel for the petitioners. He submits that petitioners and co- accused were found in possession of Ganja weighing 90kgs, which falls under the category of commercial quantity. Counsel further submits that looking to the rigour of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, benefit of bail should not be extended to the accused-petitioners. 4. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced at bar, especially considering the fact that petitioners and co-accused were found in possession of contraband (Ganja) weighing 90kgs, as also looking to the rigour of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail. 5. Accordingly, these bail applications stand dismissed. 6. However, petitioners would be at liberty to renew the prayer for bail after recording the testimony of Seizure Officer. 7. The observations made hereinabove are only for decision of these bail applications and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J Manoj Solanki /13 & 14