HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33315 of 2025 Court No. - 69 HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J. 1. Heard Sri Lalit Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri B.P. Singh, learned AGA for the State-respondents and perused the record. 2. The present bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, has been filed on behalf of applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 762 of 2024 under Section 8/20 NDPS Act, registered at Police Station Kosikalan, District Mathura during pendency of the trial. 3. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that co-accused Sunder has already been enlarged on bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 19.1.2026 passed in Crl. Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No.34184 of 2025 and role of the applicant is not distinguishable from the role of aforesaid co-accused who has been found to be driver of the vehicle whereas applicant is cleaner of the said vehicle from which 63.3 kg of Ganja is said to have been recovered. It is further submitted that mandatory provisions of Section 52-A of NDPS Act have not been complied with as samples have not been collected in accordance with Rules 8, 9, 10 and 11 of the Rules published by the Union of India in the official gazette nor the same have been certified by any Judicial Magistrate. It is also submitted that applicant is in jail since 20.12.2024 and there is no likelihood of the trial being concluded in near future. It is further submitted that applicant has criminal history of one case pertaining to NDPS Act and he undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty, if granted. It has also been pointed out that in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Lalit Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Prabhat .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial. 4. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant and submits that mandatory provisions of NDPS Act have been complied with and videography of the alleged recovery has also been made in accordance with section 105 BNSS. 5. As per the FIR, 63.3 kg of Ganja is said to have been recovered from a truck which was being driven by co-accused Sunder and applicant is said to be the cleaner of the said truck. Co-accused Sunder has already been enlarged on bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court. It is submitted that mandatory provisions of Section 52-A of NDPS Act have not been complied with as samples have not been collected in accordance with Rules 8, 9, 10 and 11 of the Rules published by the Union of India in the official gazette nor the same have been certified by any Judicial Magistrate. Applicant is in jail since 20.12.2024. 6. Upon considering the totality of facts, nature and evidence reflected from record, taking into consideration the provision of Section 37 of the NDPS Act and in view of the law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in Union of India vs. Shiv Shanker Kesari, 2007 (7) SCC 798 and Nadeem Ahmad vs. State of West Bengal 2025 LawSuit (SC) 1134 (2025 INSC 993) without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for bail. Hence, the present bail application is ALLOWED. 7. Let the applicant Prabhat involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions :- (i) 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. (ii) The applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses. (iii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of B.N.S.S. BAIL No. 33315 of 2025 2 (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 the trial court. (v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. 8. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 9. It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order. May 5, 2026 Madhurima BAIL No. 33315 of 2025 3 (Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.) Digitally signed by :- MADHURIMA GARG High Court of Judicature at Allahabad