HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 20074 of 2025 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Mohd. Danish, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 102 of 2025, under Section 8/20 of The Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Police Station- Civil Lines, District Moradabad, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per the allegations of the FIR, 1100 gms of charas is said to have been recovered from the possession of the applicant by the police on 12.02.2025 at about 9:30 p.m. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with a view to cause unnecessary harassment and to victimize him. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that there is no compliance of mandatory provision of Sections 50 and 52A of the N.D.P.S. Act and Section 105 of BNSS. There is no report of the chemical analyst to corroborate that the alleged contraband is charas or not. 6. The criminal history of five cases assigned to the applicant stands explained. The applicant is languishing in jail since 13.02.2025. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mohammad Danish Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Arjun Singh Vohra Alias Arjun Singh .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 7. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application. 8. In the case of Prabhakar Tewari Vs. State of U.P. and another, (2020) 11 SCC 648, the Supreme Court has observed that pendency of several criminal cases against an accused by itself cannot be a basis for refusal of bail. 9. Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment as well as totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail. 10. Let the applicant - Arjun Singh Vohra Alias Arjun Singh, who is involved in aforementioned case crime 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified. i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during trial. ii) The applicant shall not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses. iii) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed. 11. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 12. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. September 25, 2025 Sumit S BAIL No. 20074 of 2025 2 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- SUMIT SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad