HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33136 of 2025 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Atmaram Nadiwal, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Rajendra Prasad Singh, learned State Law Officer for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 359 of 2025, under Section 8/20 of The Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Police Station- Kotwali Dehat, District Saharanpur, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per the allegations of the FIR, 150 grams of Charas is said to have been recovered from the possession of the applicant by the police on 17.08.2025 at about 1:30 p.m. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with a view to cause unnecessary harassment and to victimize him. The contraband recovered is below the commercial quantity. There is no report of the chemical analyst to corroborate the allegations that the alleged contraband is Charas. There is no compliance of mandatory provision of Section 52A of the N.D.P.S. Act. The criminal history of one case assigned to the applicant stands explained. The applicant is languishing in jail since 17.08.2025. In case, the applicant is released on bail, she will not misuse the liberty of bail. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Atmaram Nadiwal, Dinesh Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Smt. Sonam Alias Shika .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 6. Learned State Law Officer has vehemently opposed the bail application. 7. The Supreme Court in Prabhakar Tewari vs. State of U.P. And Another, (2020) 11 SCC 648 has observed that pendency of several criminal cases against an accused itself cannot be a basis for refusal of bail, if otherwise his case for bail is made out. 8. Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment as well as totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage without commenting on the merits of the case, prima facie, I find it a fit case for bail. The bail application is allowed. 9. Let the applicant- Smt. Sonam Alias Shika, who is involved in aforementioned case be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified. (i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence during trial. (ii) The applicant shall not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses. (iii) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed. 10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 11. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. September 25, 2025 (Ravi Kant) BAIL No. 33136 of 2025 2 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- SUMIT SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad