Order : 1. This second application for bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner who has been arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.76/2024 registered at Police Station Nimbahera Sadar, Dist. Chittorgarh, for the offences under Sections 8/15 and 8/29 of NDPS Act. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in the present case, contraband (poppy husk/straw) weighing 22 quintals 21 kgs and 700 gms. was recovered from a Tata truck bearing registration No.PB-02-AY-7275. The offending vehicle was being driven by co-accused Baljinder Singh. Co-accused- Baljinder Singh in his statements recorded on 10.03.2024 divulged an information that he had procured the recovered contraband on being asked by co-accused- Aditya Jain from another co-accused- Ismail S/o Noor Mohammad. Co-accused- Ismail in turn divulged an information that he alongwith the present petitioner on 08.03.2024 loaded the recovered contraband in the offending vehicle. Learned counsel submitted that the statements of the Investigating Officer- Ram Sumer (PW.2) have already been recorded before the competent criminal Court. The statements of the Investigating Officer (PW.2) clearly indicates that apart from the disclosure statements of co- accused persons, there is no direct/circumstantial evidence available on record indicating involvement of the petitioner in commission of the alleged crime. 4. Learned counsel 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. 6. 4. Learned counsel 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. 6. The relevant portion of the cross-examination of the Investigating Officer (PW.2) is reproduced below for ready reference:- ^^izn'kZ ih 33 esa nksuks xokg iqfyldehZ gksdj esjs v/khuLFk gS ml rLnhd eksds ij ,sls dksbZ nLrkosth ;k Lor=a lk{; ugh feyh tks eqckfjd }kjk bLekbZy ;k vU; vfHk;qDr dks MksMkpqjk Hkjkus ;k [kjhn Qjks[r djrs ns[kk gks o vU; vkjksih ls Hkh lac/k LFkkfir djus okys dksbZ nLrkosth lk{; ugh feysA izn'kZ ih 34] 35 nksuks xokg iqfyldehZ gksdj esjs v/khuLFk gSA mDr edku vtht vtesjh dk gks o vtht vtesjh LokfeRo o vkf/kiR; lac/kh nksjkus ryk'kh ,sls dksbZ nLrkosth lk{; ugh feys tks vtht vtesjh o eqckfjd dks vkil esa tksM+rh gks ,oa mDr izn'kZ ih 34 ij ,sls dksbZ vkykekr ugh feys tks eqckfjd dks rLnhd eksds ls tksM+rh gksA --------------------- ;g lgh gS fd eq[; vfHk;qDr dk o vkfnR; tsu dk eqckfjd ls dksbZ lac/k LFkkfir djus okys nkSjkus vuqla/kku eq>s dksbZ lk{; izkIr ugh gq, uk gh mUgkasus vius fdlh dFku ;k 27 dh lqpuk] rLnhd eksdk vkfn esa dksbZ c;ku ugh fn;sA ;g lgh gS fd mDr izdj.k esa nksjkus vuqla/kku eq[; vfHk;qDr o vU; vkjksfi;kas dk eqckfjd ls lac/k LFkkfir djus okys fdlh izdkj ds Lor=a o nLrkosth lk{; o eksckby dkWy fMVsy ;k chVh,l yksds'ku vkfn izkIr ugha gqbZ tks eqckfjd dk eq[; vfHk;qDr o vU; vfHk;qDr bLekbZy ls lac/k LFkkfir djrh gksA^^ 7. Having considered the rival submissions, facts and circumstances of the case, this Court prima facie finds that the contraband was not recovered from the conscious possession of the present petitioner; the petitioner has been implicated in the present case solely on the basis of disclosure statements of the co-accused persons; the Investigating Officer (PW.2) during his cross-examination before the competent criminal Court has admitted that apart from the disclosure statements of co-accused persons, there is no direct/circumstantial evidence available on record indicating the involvement of the petitioner in commission of the alleged crime; the petitioner does not have any criminal antecedents; learned Public Prosecutor has not shown any apprehension of the petitioner involving himself in a case of similar nature or fleeing away from justice, in case, he is enlarged on bail by this Court. Thus, without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. 8. Consequently, the second bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed. It is ordered that the accused-petitioner Mubarik Ajmeri S/o Sri Tayyab Ajmeri arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.76/2024 registered at Police Station Nimbahera Sadar, Dist. Chittorgarh, 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. 9. 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.