HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8966 of 2025 Court No. - 15 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. 1.Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the record. 2.Prosecution story is that while the police party was on patrolling duty, on an information received from informer that a person waiting in Nagram for some deal, the police team reached near Sameshi Nashar bridge. It is further alleged that the informer informed the police team regarding a black colour Scorpio vehicle loaded with ganja. The vehicle was apprehended with application of necessary force. The applicant allegedly sitting on the rear seat of driver was arrested, however, the driver managed to escape from the spot. Nothing was recovered from the personal search of the applicant, however, eight bags containing 77 packets of ganja have allegedly been recovered from the diggi of alleged vehicle, the total weight thereof was found to be 156.60kg of ganja. The said occurrence has allegedly taken place on 3.8.2025 at about 23.47hours. 3.Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated due to election rivalry of Gram Pradhan. Mandatory provisions of section 42 N.D.P.S. Act have not been followed as the said information has not been reduced in writing and the copy thereof has not been forwarded to the higher officer in stipulated time although private vehicle was searched. There is no independent eye witness to the alleged recovery. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Anil Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Shivam Yadav .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) It is submitted that arrest and the recovery both were pre-planned, although as per admitted case of the prosecution, after the recovery and arrest, the first information report has been registered, however, the arrest memo already bears mention of case crime No.181 of 2025 which is not possible. Specific pleading in this regard has been taken in para 2 of the supplementary affidavit to which there is no denial in the counter affidavit filed by the State. The applicant has no criminal history of any NDPS case although he has one criminal history which has been explained in para 31 of the bail application. The entire prosecution story is fabricated. The applicant has been framed in this case maliciously. The entire exercise has been done sitting in the police station. The is in jail since 3.8.2025. It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released on bail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. 4.Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the search was conducted in presence of the ACP. Information was sent by the team to the ACP concerned, however, he could not show from the record that the information received by the police team was reduced into writing and the copy of the same was sent to the higher officer as required under section 42 of NDPS Act. 5.Prima facie, from the argument advanced and perusal of the record, it appears that the applicant may not be guilty during trial since he has no other criminal history of NDPS case, he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail, thus the twin conditions as mentioned in section 37(1)(b) of N.D.P.S. Act having been satisfied, and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail and accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 6.Let the applicant Shivam Yadav, involved in Case Crime No. 181 of 2025 under Sections 8/20/25/60 N.D.P.S. Act, P.S. Nagram, district BAIL No. 8966 of 2025 2 Lucknow, 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 under Section 229-A I.P.C. (now 269 BNS) (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 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 I.P.C. (now 209 BNS) October 27, 2025 kkb/ BAIL No. 8966 of 2025 3 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- KRISHNA KUMAR BARANWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench