Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:17501 Court No. - 13 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2472 of 2025 Applicant :- Jai Krishna Yadav @ Chaman Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Dilip Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the State and perused the record. 3. This first bail application has been filed with regard to Case Crime No.45 of 2025, under Sections 8/20(b) (2b)/27A/29/60(3) N.D.P.S Act, registered at P.S.-Deeh District -Raebareli. 4. As per contents of First Information Report, upon an information being provided by the informant, white Innova Car bearing no.UP 42 BC 2078 was apprehended by the police party and narcotics were recovered from the applicant and co- accused. The FIR indicates that provision of Section 50 of NDPS Act have sufficiently been complied with since the applicant declined to be examined before the Magistrate despite information being supplied to him. 5. It has been submitted by learned counsel for applicant that the applicant has falsely been implicated in the charges levelled against him and that the FIR clearly indicates non-compliance of Section 50 of NDPS Act. It is also submitted that the sampling process indicated is also not in accordance with the rules framed under the Act. He submits that involvement of the applicant is only on the basis of extra judicial confessional statement which even otherwise is inadmissible as per the Evidence Act. It is also submitted that the previous criminal history of the applicant has been explained in supplementary affidavit filed today and he is languishing in jail since 01.03.2025. 6. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail application with the submission that a bare perusal of the FIR clearly indicates the involvement of applicant and recovery of illegal narcotics from his person. It is also stated that substantial compliance of Section 50 NDPS Act has also been indicated. 7. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties, perusal of material available on record and prima facie subject to further evidence being led during trial, there does not appear to be substantive compliance of Section 50 NDPS Act and the applicant' s involvement also appears only on the basis of extra judicial confessional statement. 8. Looking to the nature of allegations levelled against the applicant and submission made in the bail application, without expressing any opinion on the merits of case and considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, particularly since no reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witnesses has been alleged, prima facie, this Court finds, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case since conditions of Section37 of NDPS Act are made out. 9. Accordingly bail application is allowed. 10. Let applicant, Jai Krishna Yadav @ Chaman involved in the aforesaid case crime 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 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. (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 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 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, 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 in accordance with law. Order Date :- 27.3.2025 Satish Digitally signed by :- SATISH KUMAR BHARATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- SATISH KUMAR BHARATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench