Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:41678 Court No. - 14 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6657 of 2025 Applicant :- Mohd. Muslim @ Munnavar 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 Karunesh Singh Pawar,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record. 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. 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. It is also submitted that the name of the applicant has surfaced in the statement of co-accused Jai Krishan Yadav @ Chaman, who has already been granted bail vide order dated 27.03.2025 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 2472 of 2025. The applicant, therefore, seeks parity with the said co-accused. No recovery has been made from the applicant, and the quantity allegedly recovered from the co-accused is below the commercial quantity. The applicant has no prior criminal record and is in custody since 27.06.2025. It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released from jail 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 but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant. On due consideration to the bail order of co-accused Jai Krishan Yadav @ Chaman in whose statement name of the applicant has surfaced, so also the fact that the recovered quantity is below commercial, and the applicant has no criminal antecedents and is in custody since 27.06.2025, I am of the view that the applicant deserves to be released on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant Mohd. Muslim @ Munnavar involved in 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, 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 82 Cr.P.C. (now 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 174-A IPC (now Section 209 of BNS). It is clarified that the observations made in this order are confined to the present anticipatory bail application and shall have no bearing on the merits of the trial. Order Date :- 21.7.2025 R.C. Digitally signed by :- RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench