HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 28749 of 2025 Court No. - 66 HON'BLE ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA, J. Heard Sri Rahul Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Purshottam Maurya, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record of the case. The present bail application under Section 483 BNSS has been filed on behalf of applicant, Rakhi, with a prayer to release her on bail in Case Crime No. 394 of 2025, under Section 111 BNS and 8/20 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Police Station-Loni Border, District-Ghaziabad. Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that 2.100 Kilogram of Ganja is alleged to have been recovered from the possession of the applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that although the alleged Ganaja is below commercial quantity. In fact no such recovery was effected from the applicant. It is further submitted that since such recovery is not supported by independent witness, possibility of her false implication in the crime cannot be ruled out. It is next contended that in the present case the prosecution has failed to follow strictly the provisions of Section 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act. There is no report of chemical analyst. It is also argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present crime with a view to cause unnecessary harassment and victimize her. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that no case under Section 111 BNS is made out against the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 25.06.2025. Criminal history of seven cases has been explained in paragraph no. 16 of the affidavit filed in support of bail application, deserves to be released on bail. In case the applicant is released on bail she will not misuse the liberty of bail. Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage who is involved in supplying contraband, therefore, the applicant does not deserve any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail she will again indulge in similar activity. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rahul Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Rakhi .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) Considering the facts of the case and keeping in mind 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 commenting on merit of case, a case for bail is made out. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant-Rakhi, involved in abovesaid case crime be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that :- 1. The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial. 2. The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment. 3. The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. September 12, 2025 Deepak/ BAIL No. 28749 of 2025 2 (Ashutosh Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- DEEPAK KUMAR KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad