Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:40377 Court No. - 14 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1840 of 2025 Applicant :- Siddharth Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Govt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Farooq Ayoob,Anil Kumar Pandey,Jyoti Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the record. In the prosecution case, it is alleged that the Special Task Force (STF) received a secret information that two individuals were traveling in bus No. NL02B7077 carrying illegal charas and heading towards Rajasthan. Acting on this information, the bus was intercepted, and both individuals were apprehended. It is further alleged that a trolley bag was recovered from them, and upon inspection, 13 packets of charas weighing 5.920 kg were found inside. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that although the recovery is alleged to have been made from a public transport vehicle, no passenger present in the bus was made a witness. Moreover, the seat number occupied by the applicant has not been mentioned in the recovery memo. Although the search is said to have been conducted in the presence of the Circle Officer, he has not been cited as a prosecution witness. There is no material on record to connect the applicant with the said trolley bag, which does not belong to him. The applicant has been falsely implicated, and the recovery is nothing but a sham. Moreover, the co-accused Amit Kumar has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 9.7.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 1495 of 2025. Hence, the present applicant seeks parity. It is further submitted that the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents and he is in custody since 29.12.2024. There is no likelihood of the applicant fleeing from judicial custody or tampering with prosecution witnesses. If released on bail, he undertakes not to misuse the liberty so granted. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail application. Perused the record. Upon consideration of the material on record, including the manner of search and seizure, non-compliance with mandatory provisions of Section 42 of the NDPS Act, the absence of any mention of the applicant's seat number in the recovery memo and the lack of evidence connecting him to the recovered bag, this Court is of the view that the prosecution case appears doubtful at this stage. It is also observed that although the seizure is claimed to have been made in the presence of the Circle Officer, neither has he been cited as a prosecution witness nor has his statement been recorded, which further undermines the reliability of the recovery proceedings. Considering the above facts and circumstances, and the fact that the applicant has no prior criminal record under the NDPS Act, the co-accused Amit Kumar has already been granted bail by this Court, the twin conditions under Section 37(1)(b) of the NDPS Act appear to be satisfied there are reasonable grounds for believing that the applicant may not be held guilty of the alleged offence and he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant- Siddharth Kumar involved in Case Crime/F.I.R. No. 546/2024, under Sections 8/20 (b)(ii)-(C) of N.D.P.S. Act, P.S. Satrikh, District Barabanki, be released on bail on his 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 will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he 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. (v) 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 in accordance with law. (vi) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 84 BNSS 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, in accordance with law under Section 209 of BNS. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are confined to the present bail application and shall have no bearing on the merits of the trial. Order Date :- 15.7.2025 Shravan Digitally signed by :- SHRAVAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench