HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 17879 of 2025 Court No. - 70 HON'BLE DR. GAUTAM CHOWDHARY, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the record. 2. The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 203 of 2023, under Sections 8/20/29/60 of N.D.P.S. Act, Police Station- Shikohabad, District Firozabad, during pendency of trial. 3. Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the quantity of the contraband shown to be recovered from the possession of the applicant and co-accused persons is 175 kilograms of Ganga is alleged to have been recovered and one mobile phone or some adhar card and E- Shramn Card and Rs. 800/- from the possession of the applicant. Learned counsel further argued that Section 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act has not been complied with and in this regard, learned counsel has drawn attention of this Court to F.I.R.-cum-recovery memo, wherein it has been stated that during the course of search, when the applicant and the co-accused had stated that they will give their search before the Gazatted Officer, upon which, the Circle Officer Shikohbad was telephonically informed, who stated that he is busy in patrolling and would reach the spot but the police personnel himself made searched inspite of Circle Officer. Further contention is that the police has deliberately shown the amount exaggeratedly just in order to add to the gravity of the offence. Other submissions assailing the the truthfulness of the prosecution story with regard to the recovery have also been made. Further contention is that the statutory provisions of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 have not been complied with in true letter and spirit, and therefore, the legal sanctity of the alleged recovery stands vitiated. The counsel has also tried to demonstrate the circumstances indicating the false implication of the applicant. Malice behind the prosecution has also been pleaded during the course of the arguments placed on behalf of the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Abhishek Vishwakarma, Ramesh Kumar Ojha Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Dharmendra .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) accused. It has also been pointed out that the applicant is jail since 31.03.2025. 4. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail. 5. After perusing the record in the light of the submissions made at the bar and after taking an overall view of all the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this Court is of the view, that the applicant may be enlarged on bail. 6. Let applicant-Dharmendra involved in the above mentioned crime be enlarged on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:- i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence. ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses. iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court. iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission. v) 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 such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. 7. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant in accordance with law. 8. The bail application is allowed. September 16, 2025 S.Ali BAIL No. 17879 of 2025 2 (Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHAUKAT ALI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad