HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1242 of 2025 Court No. - 15 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. 1.The present anticipatory bail application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in case crime No.22 of 2024 under sections 8(c)/20/29 of N.D.P.S. Act, P.S. N.C.B., district Lucknow. 2.Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Akhilesh Kumar Awasthi, learned counsel for N.C.B. and perused the record. 3.Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated. She has explained criminal history of one case in para 8 of the bail application. The applicant who is a lady is a resident of Jharkhand. Maliciously, only on the basis of the statement of the co- accused, the applicant has been implicated in this case. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent has opposed the prayer made by applicant's counsel. It is submitted that the accused applicant has been contacted several times, notices were sent to her to cooperate in the investigation and even the team went to Jharkhand, still no cooperation has been extended by the applicant. The investigation is pending since 2024 because of non-cooperation of the applicant. Custodial interrogation is required. 5.I have considered the submission and perused the record. A perusal of the record shows that from the possession of the co-accused Jyoti Devi Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Vinay Kumar, Sandeep Kumar Ojha, Shashi Dhar Mishra, Shrikant Tripathi, Touqeer Ahmad Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Akhilesh Kumar Awasthi Smt. Sangita Devi .....Applicant(s) U.O.I. Thru. Intelligence Officer Narcotics Crime Bureaue Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) and Bhagmati Devi, 22 packets containing 500gms each, totalling about 11 kg charas have been recovered. In their statement under section 67 of NDPS Act, complicity of the applicant came into light. The submission of applicant's counsel that the applicant has been falsely implicated by the prosecuting agency does not carry force as the seizure has been conducted by a Central Agency. There is almost no probability for the officers of a Central agency to have any grudge against the applicant. The seized quantity is several times more than the commercial quantity. 6.Considering the above aspects of the matter, perusal of the record, as also the submission advanced by Mr. Akhilesh Awasthi that no cooperation has been extended by the applicant and because of that, the investigation could not be completed since December, 2024, coupled with the fact that prima facie, custodial interrogation is required, this court is not inclined to show indulgence in this case. 7.The anticipatory bail application lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed. November 11, 2025 kkb/ ABAIL No. 1242 of 2025 2 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- KRISHNA KUMAR BARANWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench