Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:119663 Court No. - 87 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 28093 of 2024 Applicant :- Anuj Alias Bhola Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Kamar Shah Alam Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Avnish Saxena,J. 1. Learned AGA filed counter affidavit to furnish the FSL report. The same is taken on record. 2. The present bail application has been moved by the applicant- accused Anuj Alias Bhola for the offence punishable under Sections 8/20/29/37 of N.D.P.S. Act in Case Crime No. 347 of 2024, Police Station- Garhmukteshwar, District-Hapur. 3. Sri Mohd. Kamar Shah Alam, learned advocate appeared for the applicant and submitted that the accused has been falsely implicated in this case by the police, when the Skoda car of co- accused Babi @ Bobi has been apprehend by the police with the 100 Kg Ganja has been recovered. It is further submitted that the mandatory compliance of Section 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act has not been carried out. It is next submitted that the entire arrest and recovery has been carried out in absence of independent witness. Main accused Babi @ Bobi has already been granted bail by a co- ordinate Bench of this Court. One case of criminal history shown is the subsequent offence registered against the accused-applicant. He is in jail since July, 2024. As such, the accused applicant is liable to be released on bail. 4. Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by contending that 100 kg of Ganja has been recovered, which attract Section 37 of N.D.P.S. Act. The charge sheet has been submitted against the accused applicant. The mandatory compliance of the NDPS Act has been made. The applicant does not deserve any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail, he will again indulge in similar activity. 5. This court has taken into consideration the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. 6. It is settled position of law that bail is the rule and committal to jail is an exception as propounded in the case of State of Rajasthan Vs. Balchand @ Baliay (1977) 4 SCC 308, the Apex Court observed that refusal of bail is a restriction on the personal liberty of the individual guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution and opined para 2 "The basic rule may perhaps be tersely put as bail, not jail, except where there are circumstances suggestive of fleeing from justice or thwarting the course of justice or creating other troubles in the shape of repeating offences or intimidating witnesses and the like, by the petitioner who seeks enlargement on bail from the court. We do. not intend to be exhaustive but only illustrative." and considering the facts of the case and keeping in mind, the ratio of the Apex Court's judgment in the case of Gudikanti Narasimhulu And Ors vs Public Prosecutor, High Court Of Andhra Pradesh, (1978) 1 SCC 240 larger mandate of Article 21 of the constitution of India, the nature of accusations, the nature of evidence in support thereof, the severity of punishment which conviction will entail, the character of the accused-applicant, circumstances which are peculiar to the accused, reasonable possibility of securing the presence of the accused at the trial, reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered with, the larger interest of the public/ State and other circumstances, but without expressing any opinion on the merits, I am of the view that it is a fit case for grant of bail. 7. In the case of Mohd. Muslim alias Hussain Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) [(2023) 18 SCC 166] the Apex Court observed and held that the rigour under Section 37 of N.D.P.S. Act would not come in the way, when the Court deals with the liberty of a person, as more the rigour, quicker ought to be the adjudication. 8. It prima facie reveals from the record that the arrest and recovery has been made in absence of independent witness. The mandatory provisions of Section of N.D.P.S. Act is the subject matter of trial. The charge sheet has been submitted. 100 Kg Ganga was recovered on the joint recovery from the car owned by the co-accused. The accused is in jail since July, 2024. 9. Hence, without touching the merit of the case, the bail application is allowed. 10. The applicant-accused Anuj Alias Bhola 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 court concerned. Order Date :- 22.7.2025 I.A.Siddiqui (Avnish Saxena, J.) Digitally signed by :- IMRAN AHMAD SIDDIQUI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad