Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:44142 Court No. - 14 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4738 of 2025 Applicant :- Arman @ Lecture Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J. Rejoinder affidavit filed today is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the record. As per the prosecution case, 710 paper pouches containing 253.69 gms of smack are alleged to have been recovered from the possession of the applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the alleged recovery is false and planted. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. There appears to be no compliance of Section 50 of N.D.P.S. Act. Likewise, there is non-compliance of Section 52A of N.D.P.S. Act. Learned counsel next submits that the recovered contraband substance will not come under the commercial quantity as it has been weighed along with 710 paper pouches and polythene bags. The margin of 3 gms is there as the commercial quantity starts from 250 gms. Therefore, it should not treated as a commercial quantity. Moreover, the sample has been drawn contrary to the Notification No. 1/88 and 1/89 issued by the Government of India, Narcotics Department. Learned counsel for the applicant has placed reliance upon the judgement of this Court in re: Rahul vs. State of U.P. vide Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 40033 of 2023 decided on 31.10.2023. The relevant paragraph Nos. 7 and 8 thereof are extracted herein below: "7. In so far as criminal antecedents of the applicant is concerned, it is not the case of the State that applicant might tamper with or otherwise adversely influence the investigation, or that he might intimidate witnesses before or during the trial. The State has also not placed any material that applicant in past attempted to evade the process of law. If the accused is otherwise found to be entitled to bail, he cannot be denied bail only on the ground of criminal history, no exceptional circumstances on basis of criminal antecedents have been shown to deny bail to accused, hence, the Court does not feel it proper to deny bail to the applicant just on the ground that he had criminal antecedent. 8. The principle that Bail is a rule and Jail is an exception has been well recognised by Apex Court more specifically on the touch stone of Article 21 of the Constitution. The said principle has been reiterated by the Apex Court in Satyendra Kumar Antil Vs Central Bureau of Investigation and another, 2022 (10) SCC 51. Learned AGA has not shown any exceptional circumstances which would warrant denial of bail to the applicant." It is further submitted that the applicant has duly explained the criminal history of 3 cases in para no. 2 of the supplementary affidavit. He is languishing in jail since 4.5.2025. There is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released on bail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the recovered contraband substance is above the commercial quantity. On due consideration to the submissions advanced, perusal of the record, the Notification issued by the Government of India so also the fact that the recovered contraband has been weighed along with 710 paper pouches and polythene bags; the alleged recovered contraband in all probability is below the commercial quantity; there appears to be no compliance of Sections 50, 52A, 55, 56 and 57 of the N.D.P.S Act; the applicant has duly explained the criminal history; he is languishing in jail since 4.5.2025 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant- Arman @ Lecture involved in Case Crime No. 218 of 2025, under Sections 8/21 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 B.N.S.S. 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 B.N.S. Order Date :- 30.7.2025 Shravan Digitally signed by :- SHRAVAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench