JUDGMENT P.K. Lohra, J. - Accused-petitioner facing trial for offences under Section 8 read with Section 15 of the NDPS Act, Sections 353, 307/34 IPC and Section 3/25 of the Arms Act, in Sessions Case No.173/2016 pending before Special Judge, NDPS Cases, Barmer, has preferred this third bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C., 1973 2. The aforementioned sessions case is founded on FIR No.236/2015, registered at Gudamalani Police Station, District Barmer. 3. First Bail Application on behalf of petitioner was dismissed as not pressed on 13th of July 2017. Subsequently, petitioner applied for second bail application, which, too, was dismissed on 22nd of January 2018 with liberty to renew prayer afresh after recording statement of Seizure Officer. 4. Arguing on the third bail application, it is submitted by learned Senior Counsel that after rejection of second bail application, learned trial Court has made sincere endeavour to summon seizure officer inasmuch as process is issued from time to time, but he is not turning up for deposing. In support thereof, learned Senior Counsel has placed on record order-sheets of learned trial Court from 21st of February, 2018 to 20th of September, 2018. It is also argued by learned Senior Counsel that the Court has also issued bailable warrants with instructions to Director, Rajasthan Police Academy, Jaipur to serve bailable warrants but all in vain. Learned counsel has, therefore, argued that trial is being prolonged because of non-appearance of the Seizure Officer and, in that background, considering the prolonged custody of the petitioner as under-trial for more than two years and ten months, his third bail application merits favourable consideration. It is also submitted by learned counsel that there is no recovery of contraband from conscious possession of the petitioner. Learned Senior Counsel further submits that coaccused Mohanlal and Nagaram, who were subsequently apprehended, have been enlarged on bail. Learned Senior Counsel has further argued that as regards offence under Section 307 IPC, there is no cogent/direct evidence, come to the fore during investigation, so as to castigate any accused who fired gun and further there is nothing on record to show an individual injured on account of gun fire. He, therefore, submits that the allegations as such are omnibus and that is why, in the charge sheet against all the four accused persons, offence under Section 307 IPC is slapped with the aid of Section 34 IPC. 5. He, therefore, submits that the allegations as such are omnibus and that is why, in the charge sheet against all the four accused persons, offence under Section 307 IPC is slapped with the aid of Section 34 IPC. 5. Per contra, learned Addl. Advocate General has vehemently opposed the bail plea of petitioner. It is submitted by learned Addl. Advocate General that the contraband recovered in the matter is umpteen times higher than commercial quantity and, in fact, the contraband was recovered from two vehicles and in one of them, petitioner was travelling and when the said vehicle was intercepted, he fled away from the scene of occurrence. When being confronted on total collapse and non-cooperative posture of the Seizure Officer to depose before the learned trial Court, learned Addl. Advocate General submits that appropriate action shall be taken against the erring official for showing total apathy to his duties. However, leaned Addl. Advocate General did not dispute this fact that Seizure Officer has so far not appeared before the learned trial Court for recording his statements. 6. I have bestowed my consideration to the arguments advanced at Bar and also considered the prolonged custody of the petitioner besides other arguments, which are canvassed by the learned Senior Counsel to highlight material change in the circumstances. 7. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, in my opinion, it would be a fit case wherein petitioner can be granted benefit of bail by toning down rigor of Section 37 of the NDPS Act. 8. Accordingly, this third bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C., 1973 is allowed and it is ordered that accused-petitioner, Hema Ram S/o Shri Uda Ram, arrested in connection with FIR No. 236/2015, registered at Police Station Gudamalani, District Barmer, may be released on bail; provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000/- with two surety bonds of like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court with the stipulation to appear before that Court on all dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.