Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Kamlesh Saini Son Of Late Soorajmal ... vs The State Of Rajasthan ... on 26 November, 2025
Author: Sameer Jain
Bench: Sameer Jain
[2025:RJ-JP:47856]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 3364/2025
Vinod S/o Ramchandra, Aged About 32 Years, Resident Of Jugalji
Ka Mandir Manoharpur Tehsil Shahpura, District Jaipur. (At
Present Confine At Distt. Jail Jaipur).
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 3823/2025 Kamlesh Saini Son Of Late Soorajmal Saini, Aged About 30 Years, Resident Of Gangjiwali Tan Nawalpura, Police Station Manoharpur, District Jaipur (Raj.) ( At Present In Sub Jail Kotputli)
----Petitioner Versus The State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Deepak Chauhan with Mr. Anirudh Singh Rathore Mr. Rajesh Kumar Sharma with Mr. Jitendra Choudhary Mr. Sarthak For Respondent(s) : Ms. Arti Sharma, PP Mr. Rhishi Raj Singh Rathore, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN Judgment 26/11/2025
1. The instant bail applications have been filed under Section 483 BNSS on behalf of accused-applicants. The accused- applicants were arrested in connection with FIR No. 39/2025 registered at Police Station Manoharpur District Jaipur Rural for the offence(s) under Sections 8, 21, 22 of NDPS Act.
(Uploaded on 01/12/2025 at 10:19:44 AM) (Downloaded on 01/12/2025 at 06:34:24 PM) [2025:RJ-JP:47856] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-3364/2025]
2. Learned counsel for the accused-applicants submit that the applicants are sole bread earner of their families aged 32 and 30 years. It is submitted that applicants are in custody ever since 19.02.2025 and 20.02.2025. It is further submitted that recovered quantity of the contraband i.e. Tramadol Capsules was 270 gms against the commercial quantity i.e. 250 gms. It is submitted that total weight of the capsules was included with the outer coating (gelcap), which is per se illegal and contrary to the rules. It is also submitted that there are no criminal antecedents registered against the applicants and charge-sheet has been filed. Learned counsel have relied upon the order dated 25.02.2025 passed by Coordinate Bench of this Court in SBCRLMB No. 2558/2025 titled as Rohitash Vs. State of Raj.
3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail applications.
4. Considering the arguments advanced by the counsel for the parties, considering that accused-applicants are sole bread earner of their families; that there are no criminal antecedents registered against the accused-applicants; that recovered quantity of the contraband is more than the commercial quantity, which is argued by counsel for the accused-applicants to be erroneously calculated and looking to the overall facts and circumstances of the case and material on record but without commenting on merits/demerits of the case, this court is inclined to allow the bail applications of the accused-applicants and enlarge them on bail.
5. Accordingly, the bail applications under Section 483 BNSS are allowed and it is ordered that accused-applicants 1. Vinod S/o Ramchandra and 2. Kamlesh Saini Son Of Late (Uploaded on 01/12/2025 at 10:19:44 AM) (Downloaded on 01/12/2025 at 06:34:24 PM) [2025:RJ-JP:47856] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-3364/2025] Soorajmal Saini shall be enlarged on bail provided each of them furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of learned trial Judge for their appearance before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing as and when called upon to do so.
(SAMEER JAIN),J Pooja /11-12 (Uploaded on 01/12/2025 at 10:19:44 AM) (Downloaded on 01/12/2025 at 06:34:24 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)