HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 32169 of 2025 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Rakesh Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 269 of 2025, under Section 8/20 of The Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Police Station- Sasni, District- Hathras, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per the allegations of the FIR, a total of 20.390 Kg. of Ganja is said to have been recovered from a vehicle in which the applicant alongwith two other accused persons was travelling. The other two accused persons are stated to have run away from the place of recovery. 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. The allegations are per se false and if the recovered contraband is apportioned equally between the three accused persons, it would fall below the commercial quantity. The quantity of contraband has been deliberately inflated by the Investigating Officer just to make it fall within the category of commercial quantity. 6. It is further argued by learned counsel for the applicant that there is no Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rakesh Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Vikky .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) compliance of mandatory provision of Section 52A of the N.D.P.S. Act and also there is no chemical analyst's report to corroborate that the recovered contraband is Ganja. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 18.7.2025. The applicant is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 7. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application. 8. The Supreme Court in the Case of Union of India vs. Shiv Shankar Keshari, (2007) 7 SCC 798 has held that the court while considering the application for bail with reference to Section 37 of the Act is not called upon to record a finding of not guilty. It is for the limited purpose essentially confined to the question of releasing the accused on bail that the court is called upon to see if there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is not guilty and records its satisfaction about the existence of such grounds. But the court has not to consider the matter as if it is pronouncing a judgment of acquittal and recording a finding of not guilty. 9. Considering the facts of the case and keeping in mind, the ratio of the Supreme Court's judgment in the case of Union of India vs. Shiv Shankar Keshari (supra) 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. 10. Let the applicant- Vikky, who is involved in aforementioned case 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 evidence during trial. (ii) The applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses. (iii) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed. BAIL No. 32169 of 2025 2 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 19, 2025 Vikas Verma BAIL No. 32169 of 2025 3 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad