[2026:RJ-JP:1705] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 17058/2025 Banti Son of Pohap Singh, aged 33 Years, Resident of Jugla Patti Colony, Ucchain, Police Station Ucchain, District Bharatpur (Raj.) (At Present In Central Jail, Bharatpur). ----Petitioner Versus The State of Rajasthan through P.P. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Chandra Mohan Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vivek Choudhary, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 15/01/2026 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.418/2024 registered at Police Station Sewar, District Bharatpur for offence punishable under Section 8/20 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 no contraband has been recovered from the possession of petitioner. Counsel submits that co-accused namely- Sunil Sharma who was found in possession of contraband i.e. 6.70 kgs of Ganja, has already been granted benefit of bail by co- ordinate Bench of this Court. It is submitted that trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Petitioner is in custody since [2026:RJ-JP:1705] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-17058/2025] 02.12.2025. Further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail application. He submits that two other cases of similar nature have been registered against 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, especially considering the fact that no contraband has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner; co-accused Sunil Sharma who was found in possession of contraband, has already been granted benefit of bail by co- ordinate Bench of this Court.; trial will take considerable time in its conclusion as well as looking to the period of custody, 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 – Banti Son of Pohap Singh shall be released on bail provided, he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakh Only) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.2,50,000/- (Rupees Two Lakh Fifty 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 [2026:RJ-JP:1705] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-17058/2025] mark his presence in first week of every month in the concerned police station, till conclusion of the trial. 8. Concerned SHO shall enter attendance of the petitioner in the Roznamcha. In case the petitioner fails to mark his presence in the concerned police station, 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. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the concerned SHO for necessary compliance. 11. The observations made hereinabove are only for decision of the bail application and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J LALIT MOHAN /147