Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:89717 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13597 of 2025 Applicant :- Ranjeet Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vinay Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Heard Sri Vinay Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Suresh Bahadur Singh, learned AGA for the State-respondent. 2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 0712 of 2023, under Sections 8/20/29 N.D.P.S. Act, Police Station- Sirsaganj, District- Firozabad, during pendency of the trial in the court below. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that however, this is the second bail application filed on behalf of applicant and his first bail application was dismissed by this Court after considering the fact that from the possession of applicant and other accused persons huge commercial quantity of Ganja was recovered but he is pressing the instant second bail application on the ground that after rejection of first bail application of the applicant, bail application of co-accused Lavkesh Kumar was allowed by co- ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 07.04.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 7431 of 2024 and after that another co-accused Ravi Kumar has also been released on bail by this Court vide order dated 14.05.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 9200 of 2025 and on facts case of applicant is exactly at par with them as both the above co-accused persons were also arrested along with the applicant. 4. He further submitted that applicant was not having any previous criminal history of NDPS Act and in the present matter, he is in jail since 08.11.2023 i.e. for last more than one and half year. 5. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that from the possession of applicant and co-accused Lavkesh Kumar and Ravi Kumar huge commercial quantity of Ganja was recovered but could not dispute the fact that after rejection of first bail application of the applicant, bail application of co-accused Lavkesh Kumar has been allowed by co-ordinate Bench of this Court and thereafter, considering this fact, co- accused Ravi Kumar has also been released on bail by this Court and case of applicant is at par with them. 6. 6. He further could not dispute the fact that applicant is having no previous criminal history of NDPS Act and in the present matter, he is in jail for last more than one and half years. 7. I have heard both the parties and perused the record of the case. 8. However, this is the second bail application filed on behalf of applicant and his first bail application was dismissed after considering the fact that from the possession of applicant and co- accused Lavkesh Kumar and Ravi Kumar huge commercial quantity of Ganja was recovered but it reflects, after rejection of first bail application of applicant, co-accused Lavkesh Kumar was released on bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court and thereafter co-accused Ravi Kumar has also been released on bail by this Court and on facts, case of applicant is at par with them. 9. The Apex Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another (2022) 10 SCC 51 in paragraph no. 98 has observed that- "Uniformity and certainty in the decisions of the court are the foundations of judicial dispensation. Persons accused with same offence shall never be treated differently either by the same court or by the same or different courts. Such an action though by an exercise of discretion despite being a judicial one would be a grave affront to Articles 14 and 15 of the Constitution of India." 10. Considering the observation made by the Apex Court in case of Satender Kumar (supra), bail application of applicant can be allowed on the ground of parity, considering the provisions of Article 14 and 15 of Constitution of India. 11. Further, applicant is not having any previous criminal history of NDPS Act and in the present matter, he is in jail for last more than one and half years. 12. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 13. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 14. Let the applicant- Ranjeet be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted. (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make 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 any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity. 15. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant. 16. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. Order Date :- 26.5.2025 KK Patel Digitally signed by :- KRISHN KANT PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad