Allowed

Raju Mali @ Raju Kaka S/O Moolchand v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC4 Feb 2025CRLMB/1281/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Rajasthan granted bail to the petitioner arrested under the NDPS Act. The court noted no contraband was recovered from the petitioner but disapproved of his detention due to the trial's expected duration, releasing him on personal bail with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail via personal bond of Rs.50,000 and two sureties of Rs.25,000 each with strict attendance conditions.

Raju Mali @ Raju Kaka S/O Moolchand Vs State of Rajasthan — Narcotics (NDPS) | Rajasthan HC (2025)

¶1

[2025:RJ-JP:4769]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 1281/2025

¶4

Raju Mali @ Raju Kaka S/o Moolchand, Aged About 45 Years, R/o Bundi Police Station Anta, At Present Mataji Ke Mandir Ke Pass, Harijan Basti Sursagar, P/s Uddhognagar, District Kota, (Accused Presently Confined At Central Jail Baran).

¶5

----Accused-Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P.

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Bhim Singh Meena, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Ms. Arti Sharma, PP, Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN

¶11

Order

¶12

04/02/2025

¶13

The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.373/2024 registered at Police Station Kotwali Baran, District Baran for the offences punishable under Sections 8/20 of NDPS Act. Investigation is being conducted in this matter for the offences punishable under Sections 8/20 and 8/29 NDPS Act.

¶14

It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel submits that no contraband has been recovered from possession of the petitioner. He has been made accused simply on the basis of interrogation of co-accused, who was found in possession of contraband ganja (1.200 kgs). The co-accused

(2 of 3)

[2025:RJ-JP:4769]

[CRLMB-1281/2025]

has already been granted benefit of bail by the learned trial Court. He further submits that trial of the case will take considerable time. He argues that the petitioner is in custody since 12.01.2025 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose.

¶19

Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. She submits that three other criminal cases including one case under the NDPS Act have been registered against the petitioner.

¶20

I have considered the contentions.

¶21

Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner, especially the fact that no contraband has been recovered from possession of the petitioner and trial will take 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.

¶22

This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner - Raju Mali @ Raju Kaka S/o Moolchand 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.

(3 of 3)

[2025:RJ-JP:4769]

[CRLMB-1281/2025]

It is made clear that the accused-petitioner shall not involve in any other offence(s) during currency of the bail and he shall mark his presence in first week of every month in the concerned police station, till trial is concluded.

¶27

Concerned SHO is directed to maintain a register recording the attendance of the petitioner, as directed above. In case the petitioner fails to mark his presence in the concerned police station, as directed above, the concerned SHO is directed to immediately report the matter to the concerned Court in this regard.

¶28

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.

¶29

(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J

¶30

MADAN/218

Raju Mali @ Raju Kaka S/O Moolchand v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raju Mali @ Raju Kaka S/O Moolchand v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Govind Ram S/O Gangaram Vs State of Rajasthan

Bhimsingh S/O Kanwarsingh Vs State of Rajasthan

Chintu S/O Amichand Vs State of Rajasthan

Rajkumar S/O Bhagwan Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Balvindra Singh S/O Soudan Singh @ Sohan Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Sandeepkumar S/O Shri Bagad Singh Vs State of Rajasthan