HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12267 of 2026 Court No. - 64 HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J. 1. Learned Brief Holder for the State submits that he has received the instructions and he has no objection if the bail application is decided on merits. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Nagendra Kumar Mishra, learned Brief Holder for the State-opposite party, and perused the record. 3. The instant bail application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 45 of 2026, under Sections 8/20/25/29/60(3) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, Police Station Bichwa, District Mainpuri during the pendency of trial. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. False recovery of 23.900 kg. Ganja (two packets) has been shown from a car. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. The mandatory provisions contained under Sections 42, 50, 52-A of the N.D.P.S. Act have not been complied with. The procedure for sampling provided under Rules 8, 9, 10 and 11 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (Seizure, Storage, Sampling and Disposal) Rules, 2022 have been violated. There is no F.S.L. report to establish that the substance recovered is Ganja. While weighing the recovered substance, the police has weighed it along with packing material. The police has deliberately shown the quantity of the alleged narcotics substance marginally higher in order to add to the gravity of the offence. No accurate scientific instruments were used for weighment. Inventory of the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Roopesh Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Harsh Pal .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) seized contraband was not duly certified by the Magistrate. At this stage there is no corroborative evidence to link the applicant with the offence. The applicant is in jail since 03.03.2026 having no criminal history and in case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty. 5. Learned Brief Holder for the State has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the record, I am of the prima facie view that the mandate of Chapter V of the NDPS Act has not been followed. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. The procedure for sampling provided under Rules 8, 9, 10 and 11 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (Seizure, Storage, Sampling and Disposal) Rules, 2022 have been violated. At this stage there is no corroborative evidence to link the applicant with the offence. Moreover, the applicant has remained confined for more than one and half month and after submission of the charge-sheet there is no hope of early conclusion of the trial, more so when no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or delay the trial or intimidate the witness, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. 7. Let the applicant- Harsh Pal, involved in the aforesaid 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 the conditions that he: (i) shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court; (ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; and, (iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses. 8. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. April 20, 2026 SKT/- BAIL No. 12267 of 2026 2 (Vivek Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHIVA KANT TIWARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad