HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7423 of 2025 Court No. - 15 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the record. In the prosecution case, it is alleged that an FIR has been lodged against two accused persons, including the applicant. It is further alleged that, based on information received from a mukhbir, a motorcycle was intercepted. The applicant is alleged to have been the pillion rider and to have fled from the spot. The co-accused, who was apprehended with the motorcycle, is alleged to have had 684 grams of morphine (including the weight of the packet) recovered from the vehicle. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the co-accused, Mohd. Saad, who was assigned a similar role, was granted bail vide order dated 04.09.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 6122 of 2025. The applicant, however, was not arrested at the spot. Although the search was conducted in the presence of the Circle Officer, the arrest memo does not appear to bear his signature. It is further submitted that there is no likelihood of the applicant fleeing from judicial custody or tampering with prosecution witnesses. If released on bail, he undertakes not to misuse the liberty so granted. 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. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Shailendra Kumar Tiwari, Anil Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Mohd. Tufail .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) Perused the record. Learned AGA has opposed the bail application. Perused the record. A perusal of the record shows that the recovery memo does not appear to have been signed by the Circle Officer in whose presence the recovery is alleged to have taken place, which casts doubt on the authenticity of the search and seizure of the alleged substance. In view of this, this Court is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the applicant may not be found guilty of the alleged offence. Furthermore, although the applicant has a prior criminal history in an NDPS case, in the present matter he was not arrested at the spot, which suggests that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. Accordingly, the twin conditions contemplated under Section 37(1)(b) of the NDPS Act are satisfied. Having regard to the observations made hereinabove, the fact that co- accused Mohd. Saad has been granted bail, and that the applicant has been in custody since 30.06.2025, I am of the view that this is a fit case for granting bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant, Mohd. Tufail involved in Case Crime No.594 of 2025 under Sections 8/21/29/60 of N.D.P.S. Act registered at Police Station- Kotwali Nagar, District- Barabanki. , 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 BAIL No. 7423 of 2025 2 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 (Now Section 269 of 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 Section 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 IPC (now Section 209 of BNS). 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. October 13, 2025 R.C. BAIL No. 7423 of 2025 3 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench