Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:19945 Court No. - 13 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1265 of 2025 Applicant :- Rishan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Dinesh Kr. Sharma,Arshad Hafeez Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of State and perused the record. 2. First bail application has been filed with regard to Case Crime No.Case Crime No.893 of 2024, under Sections 8/21 of U.P. Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (in short N.D.P.S. Act), Police Station-Kotwali Nagar, District-Barabanki. 3. As per contents of F.I.R.,allegation has been levelled against six persons including present applicant. Further, 250 gms. Smack has been allegedly recovered from possession of applicant. The aforesaid recovered quantity is below commercial quantity. On the basis of aforesaid arrest, he has been implicated in four more cases, as recital thereof has been indicated in rejoinder affidavit annexing therewith the bail orders. 4. Learned counsel for applicant has submitted that at the time of seizure and arrest there was no independent public witness and mandatory compliance of Section 50 N.D.P.S. Act has not been followed. He has further submitted that the investigation is pending. In the cases shown against present applicant, he has been granted bail as indicated herein above. Further two similarly placed co- accused persons have been granted bail by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 12390 of 2024; order dated 02.12.2024 and Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 13055 of 2024; order dated 04.02.2025 respectively. 5 Learned counsel for the applicant has undertaken that the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail, if so granted by this Court and there is no apprehension of absconding and he shall abide by all terms and conditions of the bail order and shall cooperate with the investigation/ trial proceedings properly. 6. Learned Additional Government Advocate has, however, opposed the prayer for bail but he has not disputed the aforesaid submission of learned counsel for the applicant. 7. Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Sanjay Chandra v. Central Bureau of Investigation, reported in (2012) 1 SCC 40 has specifically held that bail is to be a norm and an under-trial is not required to be in jail for ever pending trial. Relevant paragraphs of the judgment are as under :- "21. In bail applications, generally, it has been laid down from the earliest times that the object of bail is to secure the appearance of the accused person at his trial by reasonable amount of bail. The object of bail is neither punitive nor preventative. Deprivation of liberty must be considered a punishment, unless it is required to ensure that an accused person will stand his trial when called upon. The courts owe more than verbal respect to the principle that punishment begins after conviction, and that every man is deemed to be innocent until duly tried and duly found guilty." "27. This Court, time and again, has stated that bail is the rule and committal to jail an exception. It has also observed that refusal of bail is a restriction on the personal liberty of the individual guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution." 8. Considering the fact that the recovery of contraband goods is below commercial quantity and in the cases shown as criminal history against present applicant, he has been granted bail; similarly placed co-accused person have been enlarged on bail by this Court; and considering his undertaking that he shall cooperate with the investigation / trial proceedings and shall abide all terms and conditions of bail order, without entering into merits of the issue, I am of the opinion that the present applicant may be released on bail. 9. Accordingly bail application is allowed. 10. Let applicant Rishan involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his/her furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he/she shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him/her under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his/her presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him/her, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court, absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him/her in accordance with law. Order Date :- 9.4.2025 kvg/- Digitally signed by :- GIREESAN KV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- GIREESAN KV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench