Bail can be granted when the accused is not a flight risk and the case is similar to that of a co-accused who was previously granted bail.

Order :

1. This application for bail under Section 483 of BNSS has been filed by the petitioner who has been arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.49/2017 registered at Police Station Borunda, District Jodhpur for the offences under Sections 8/18 & 29 of NDPS Act.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.

3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the matter solely on the basis of confessional statements of the co-accused Karma Ram from whose conscious contraband (opium) weighing 9 kgs. was recovered. Learned counsel further submitted that the recovery of the contraband (opium) was not made from the conscious possession of the present petitioner and the only allegation against him is that he along with co-accused Raju Lal had supplied the recovered contraband to the co-accused Karma Ram.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the co- accused Raju Lal (S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No.8061/2017) has already been enlarged on bail by the co- ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 23.10.2017. Learned counsel further submitted that case of the present petitioner is not distinguishable from that of the co-accused Raju Lal who has already been enlarged on bail. Lastly, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody; and the trial of the case will take sufficiently long time, therefore, the benefit of bail may be granted to the accused-petitioner.

5. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application. However, he was not in a position to refute the fact that the contraband was not recovered from the conscious possession of the present petitioner. He was also not in a position to refute the fact that the co-accused Raju Lal has already been enlarged on bail the co-ordinate Bench of this Court.

6. Having considered the rival submissions, facts and circumstances of the case, this Court prima facie finds that the case of the present petitioner is not distinguishable from that of the co-accused Raju Lal who has already been enlarged on bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court. This Court also prima facie finds that the prosecution has not shown any apprehension of the petitioner influencing the material prosecution witnesses or fleeing away from justice, in case he is enlarged on bail, thus, this Court is inclined to enlarged the petitioner on bail.

7. Consequently, the bail application under Section 483 of BNSS is allowed. It is ordered that the accused-petitioner Kalu Nath S/o Shri Gothu Nath arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.49/2017 registered at Police Station Borunda, District Jodhpur, shall be released on bail, if not wanted in any other case, provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- and two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each, to the satisfaction of learned trial court, for his appearance before that court on each & every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till completion of the trial.

8. It is however, made clear that findings recorded/observations made above are for limited purposes of adjudication of bail application. The trial court shall not get prejudiced by the same.