HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11408 of 2025 Court No. - 15 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. Counter affidavit filed by Sri Kuldeep Srivastava, learned counsel for the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record. Accused-applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 10 of 2025, under Sections 8/20/23 NDPS Act, P.S.-D.R.I. (Directorate of Revenue Intelligence), Lucknow Zone Unit, District-Lucknow. In the prosecution case, it is alleged that on 14.09.2025 the applicant arrived from Bangkok to Lucknow by Air India Express Flight No. IX-105. During the search of trolley baggage, belonging to the applicant, six airtight poly bags of black colour were found to be kept inside a trolley bag from which recovery of approx 5,572 grams of green coloured lumpy substance having very sharp pungent smell believed to be Ganja (hydroponic weed) has been made. Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that no recovery from the personal search of the applicant has been made. The applicant is innocent. The quantity of the recovered substance is below commercial. The applicant is in jail since 14.09.2025. On the other hand, Sri Kuldeep Srivastava, learned counsel for the D.R.I. has opposed the bail application. He submits that entire seizure as well as Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Bhavana, Bajhul Quamar Siddiqui, Kirti Arya Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Digvijay Nath Dubey Anuj Kumar Kahaar .....Applicant(s) U.O.I. Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence Lko. Zone Unit .....Opposite Party(s) recovery has been videgraphed in strict compliance of BNSS and the same has been sent for forensic examination. Mandatory provisions of NDPS Act have been duly complied with. The bags from which recovery has been made was owned and tagged to the applicant and it is not a case of false implication. 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 of the facts that recovered substance is below commercial, the applicant, having no criminal antecedents, is languishing in jail since 14.09.2025 so also the manner in which sampling has been conducted, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant-Anuj Kumar Kahaar involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to following conditions:- (i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; (ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses; (iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial Court. Any other condition(s) which the trial court/concerned court may deem fit and proper, in the circumstances of the case, may also be imposed. 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. November 26, 2025 Vinay/- BAIL No. 11408 of 2025 2 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- VINAY KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- VINAY KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- VINAY KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench