HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7058 of 2025 Court No. - 15 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as Shri S. M. Singh Royekwar, learned counsel for DRI. As per the prosecution version narrated in the FIR/Fard Baramadgi dated 11.06.2025, acting on specific information, officials of the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Lucknow intercepted two passengers who arrived at Chaudhary Charan Singh International Airport from Bangkok by Air India Flight No. IX-105. Upon searching their baggage, Ganja (hydroponic weed) was allegedly recovered concealed in an electric water geyser. It is further stated that a total of 155 packets were recovered from the possession of both accused persons, out of which 78 packets are attributed to the geyser linked with the applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that 7.800 kg of ganja has been shown to be recovered from the electric water geyser allegedly belonging to the applicant. It is argued that the prosecution claim that the recovered substance is hydroponic ganja with higher potency is unsubstantiated and unsupported by any credible material. It is further contended that, as per the recovery memo, random samples were tested by DRI officials, and the substance was merely described as ganja. He has drawn attention to page 55 of the counter-affidavit containing the test report, submitting that it only indicates a positive result for ganja and nowhere mentions it being hydroponic. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Anil Kumar Sharma, Kushboo Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Digvijay Nath Dubey, S M Singh Royekwar Pamparaboina Hemanth .....Applicant(s) U.O.I. Thru. D.R.I., Lko. Zonal Unit, Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) It is additionally submitted that the test report does not indicate the potency of the seized substance. The quantity recovered from the applicant is significantly below the commercial quantity threshold. Since, charge sheet has been filed against the applicant, no useful purpose will be served in keeping the applicant behind bars. The applicant is in custody since 12.06.2025 without having any criminal antecedents. Shri S.M. Singh Royekwar, learned counsel for the DRI, has opposed the bail application but could not dispute that the recovered quantity falls below the commercial category. Considering that the charge sheet has been filed, the recovered quantity is below commercial threshold, and the applicant is in jail since 12.06.2025 without any criminal history, I am of the view that the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant Pamparaboina Hemanth involved in Case Crime/FIR No. DRI Case No-05/2025, U/S-8/20/23/29 of N.D.P.S. Act, P. S. - DRI Gomti Nagar Lucknow, District-Lucknow, be released on bail in the aforementioned case 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 deposit his passport in case the same is with him before the learned trial court at the time of his release. (ii) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; (iii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses; (iv) 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/R.C. BAIL No. 7058 of 2025 2 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench