HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34625 of 2026 Court No. - 64 HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Nagendra Mishra, learned Brief Holder for the State-opposite party. Perused the material available on record. 2. The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 361 of 2026, under Sections 8, 20, 29 of N.D.P.S. Act, 1985, Police Station - Roravar, District - Aligarh, during the pendency of trial. 3. Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. False recovery of 5.008 Kg. Ganja has been shown from the possession of the applicant. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. The recovered contraband is below commercial quantity. The mandatory provisions contained under Sections 42, 50 and 52- A of the N.D.P.S. Act have not been complied with. There is no FSL report to establish that the substance recovered is prohibited contraband. It is next contended that the co-accused Jeenat has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 28.9.2026 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.34490 of 2026. Applicant claims parity. The applicant is in jail since 06.08.2026 having no criminal history and in case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty. 4. Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. 5. Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record, this Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Saksham Srivastava, Yasharth Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Irshad .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) Court prima facie finds that there is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. The recovered contraband is below commercial quantity. At this stage, there is no corroborative evidence to link the applicant with the offence. Further, the co-accused Jeenat has been granted bail by this Court. Moreover, the applicant has no criminal history and has remained confined for more than one and half month and there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, more so when no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicants, 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 applicants are entitled to be enlarged on bail. 6. Let the applicant Irshad, involved in the aforesaid 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 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. 7. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. September 29, 2026 Manish Kr BAIL No. 34625 of 2026 2 (Vivek Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- MANISH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad