Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:9478 Court No. - 68 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 38738 of 2024 Applicant :- Rohit Rana Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ramesh Chandra Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Ashutosh Srivastava,J. Heard Sri Ramesh Chandra Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Anil Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record of the case. The present bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed on behalf of applicant, Rohit Rana, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 459 of 2024, under Section 8C/15C/29/25 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Police Station- Muradnagar, District- Ghaziabad. Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that applicant was not arrested from the spot. At the time of recovery of 821 kg 700 grams of poppy husk, owner of the godown was present on the spot, but he did not disclose the name of applicant at that very point of time and thereafter, after four days of present recovery, the name of applicant has surfaced on record. The applicant has not taken the property on rent. On coming to know about the falsity involvement of the applicant in this very case crime number, the applicant himself surrendered before the Court below. There is no independent witness of the alleged recovery of contraband. The applicant has criminal history of two cases and in that case applicant is on bail. Applicant is the first offender in NDPS Act. There is non compliance of Section 52 of the NDPS Act. It is also argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present crime with a view to cause unnecessary harassment and victimize him. The applicant, who is in jail since 28.8.2024 having no criminal history to his credit, deserves to be released on bail. In case, the applicant is released on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail. Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submits that applicant was indulged in the business of selling and purchasing of contraband. The said godown was taken on rent by the applicant from Smt. Ankita Sharma, Proprietor of M/s Yuv Virat and Associates firm for the period from 26.5.2024 to 30.4.2025 and applicant had made payment of Rs.40,000/- as rent to the owner of the godown. In order to support his submission, learned AGA has placed reliance upon photostat copy of rent deed and payment receipt annexed at Page 26 and 47, respectively of the supplementary counter affidavit. Thus, learned AGA submits that involvement of applicant from the aforesaid incident cannot be ruled out. In the light of the facts and circumstances of the present case, it would be inappropriate to discuss the evidence in depth at this stage because it is likely to influence the trial of the accused. But, from the perusal of the evidences, collected during investigation so far, prima facie, the involvement of the accused in the present case cannot be ruled out. No reason is found to falsely implicate the applicant/accused. Therefore, there is no good ground to release the applicant-accused on bail at this stage. All the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant pertain to the merits of the case and the same cannot be considered while considering application for grant of bail. This court is unable to form an opinion at this stage that the accused has not committed an offence. In the ultimate conclusion, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, gravity of the offence, severity of punishment, in my opinion, no case for bail is made out. Accordingly, the bail application is hereby rejected. It is clarified that the observations made regarding the bail application is limited to the decision of the bail application and any observations made herein shall not effect the trial of the case. Order Date :- 21.1.2025 Ravi Prakash (Ashutosh Srivastava, J.) Digitally signed by :- RAVI PRAKASH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad