Strict adherence to the provisions of the NDPS Act is mandatory for granting bail, especially concerning commercial quantities of narcotics, as reiterated by the court's findings.

ORDER :

ASHOK KUMAR JAIN, J.

1. The second bail application under Section 483 of BNSS is filed by the applicant-accused Kishan Sansi Son Of Shri Pappu Sansi seeking bail in respect of a criminal case registered as FIR No.257/2024 dated 02.03.2024 registered at P.S. Kanota District – Jaipur, for the offence under Section 8 /20 of NDPS Act. The first bail application of petitioner was dismissed on 18.09.2025.

2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the matter and the investigation against him is complete and he is no more required in investigation. He further submits that there are no chance of fleeing of applicant accused from the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court. He also submits that the applicant undertakes not to repeat offence and cooperate with investigation/trial, which will take time.

3. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the instant case is a fabricated case wherein present petitioner was planted by police. He referred two information memos prepared to comply provision under Section 42 of NDPS Act and further timeline of the recovery and submitted that there were discrepancies in the transmitting information about the proposed recovery. He further submitted that on very same day same search and seizure officer has already initiated the proceedings in relation to FIR No.254/2024 under section 8/20 of NDPS Act and he used same seal in effecting seizure in FIR No.254/2024 and thereafter in current FIR No. is 257/2024. He further submitted that the seal which was used while conducting the proceedings in FIR No.254/2024 was destroyed by Dr. Gautam (Inspector of Police) the then SHO of P.S. Kanauta but same seal was thereafter used at the time of seizure of samples and contraband articles. He further referred cross-examination of PW-4, PW-6 and PW-7 and submitted that the material contradictions are sufficient to draw conclusion that the police has falsely implicated the petitioner without recovery from petitioner.

4. Learned counsel for petitioner has placed reliance upon judgment in case of State of Orissa Vs. Laxman Jena (2002) 3 AICLR 703 (SC) and submitted that non- compliance of mandatory provision under Sections 42 and 50 of NDPS Act is sufficient to grant bail to present petitioner. He further placed reliance upon judgment in case of Narayan Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan 2023 (9 ) WLC 573 (Raj.) and Kalu Singh Vs. CBN (bail application No. 10176/2025 order dated 11.09.2025) and submitted that present petitioner is entitled to be released on bail.

5. Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that the allegations are grave and serious in nature. He has also filed a report received from concerned Police Station.

6. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner-accused and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material placed on record by both the parties.

7. The first bail application of present petitioner was considered by this Court on 18.09.2025 and we have observed as under:-

7. On 02.03.024, Dr. Gautam, SHO P.S. Kanota on receipt of an information has searched a room at Kalpna Nagar and found two persons Kishan and Mahesh were sitting and 13 plastic gunny were also stored. After following the process 13 gunny bags were seized and found that Kishan and Mahesh are responsible for storing around 129.980 Kgs of Ganja. During investigation he came to know about sell of 10 Kgs of Ganja to Jeetu Lal Jogi. During investigation, police has found that Ganja has been transported on a motorcycle for storage in said room which was in dilapidated con