HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 765 of 2025 Court No. - 15 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. Supplementary Affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record. The accused-applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.0185 of 2024 under Section 8/21/23 of NDPS Act, Police Station Kamrauli, District Amethi. In the prosecution case, it is alleged that on 24.12.2024, while the police were on patrolling duty, they received information from an informer regarding a suspicious person sitting on a motorcycle. Acting upon the said information, the police apprehended the applicant, who disclosed his name as Shoaib Ahmed and voluntarily confessed that he was carrying illegal smack in his possession. Upon conducting his personal search, the police recovered Rs.3,500 in cash and 300 grams of smack wrapped in foil. Out of the recovered substance, 10 grams was separated as a sample for chemical examination and kept in a sealed condition separately. Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant has no criminal history. It is contended that there has been no compliance with the mandatory provisions of Section 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act, inasmuch as the applicant was not apprised of his legal right to be searched before a Magistrate or a Gazetted Officer. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Prashant Pandey, Anil Kumar Pandey, Dilip Kumar Mishra, Sushil Kumar Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party(s): G.A. Shoaib Ahmad .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko .....Opposite Party(s) Learned counsel further submits that there is no independent public witness to the alleged recovery and that other mandatory provisions under Sections 42, 43, 50, 52A, and 53A of the N.D.P.S. Act have also not been complied with. It is argued that the procedure adopted by the arresting officer is contrary to the NDPS Rules, 2022, as no inventory in Form-4 was prepared, nor was the same forwarded to the Magistrate as required under Section 52A of the N.D.P.S. Act. It is further submitted that the applicant has no previous criminal history and is in jail since 24.12.2024. There is no likelihood of his fleeing from justice or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he undertakes not to 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. He submits that the recovery of alleged contraband is of commercial quantity and the applicant is not liable to be enlarged on bail. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, and upon considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, it prima facie appears that the applicant was not searched before a Gazetted Officer or a Magistrate, and thus, the mandatory provisions of Section 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act do not appear to have been complied with; coupled with the facts that the applicant has no previous criminal history, the twin conditions mentioned under Section 37(1)(b) of the N.D.P.S. Act stand satisfied, inasmuch as there are reasonable grounds for believing that the applicant is not guilty of the alleged offence and is not likely to commit any offence while on bail; 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 Shoaib Ahmad involved in aforesaid case crime number 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:- BAIL No. 765 of 2025 2 (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 under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (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. 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. November 7, 2025 Madhu D.R/P.S BAIL No. 765 of 2025 3 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench