HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 7799 of 2025 Court No. - 72 HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed by the learned counsel for the applicant today is taken on record. 2. Heard Sri Rahul Gaur, holding brief of Mohd. Naushad, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Manoj Gautam, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 133 of 202, under Sections 8/20/29 NDPS Act, Police Station Adarsh Mandi, District Shamli with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail. 4. It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has an apprehension that he may be arrested in the above- mentioned case. He further submits that no offence is made out against the applicant. It is further submitted that the applicant has not been apprehended on the spot and the name of the applicant has surfaced by the arrested co-accused Watan Raj. It is submitted that alleged recovery of 525 gram charas does not come within the purview of commercial quantity. It is submitted that the applicant is having criminal history, which has been explained in the supplementary affidavit filed today. It was also submitted that applicant undertakes to co-operate during trial and he would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court. It has been stated that in case, applicant is granted anticipatory Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mohd. Naushad Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Shivam Balmiki .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate with the investigation and would obey all conditions of bail. 5. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the application for anticipatory bail, however, he does not dispute the factual aspect. 6. I have considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties. 7. The applicant has not been arrested on the spot and his name has surfaced on the confessional statement of the arrested accused. Nothing has been recovered from the possession of the applicant and the alleged recovery from the possession of co-accused is 525 gram charas which is not of commercial quantity. 8. It may be stated that in case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694, it has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court that while deciding anticipatory bail, the Court must consider nature and gravity of accusation, antecedent of accused, possibility of accused to flee from justice and that Court must evaluate entire available material against the accused carefully and that the exact role of the accused has also to be taken into consideration. 9. Considering the settled principle of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case and taking note of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, without expressing any opinion on merits, a case for anticipatory bail is made out. 10. The anticipatory bail application is allowed. 11. In the event of arrest of the applicant- Shivam Balmiki involved in the aforesaid case crime, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned till submission of police report under Section 193(3) BNSS, with the following conditions :- (i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence and that he would appear before the trial Court on the date fixed unless exempted by the Court NABAIL No. 7799 of 2025 2 concerned; (ii) 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 him/her/them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (iii) The applicant would cooperate during trial and would not misuse the liberty of bail. (iv) The applicant shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court concerned. 12. In default of any of the conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant herein. October 13, 2025 Abhishek NABAIL No. 7799 of 2025 3 (Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.) Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad