Allahabad High Court
RAMCHARAN VERMAversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- VIVEK VARMA
Holding
The Court granted bail to the accused, finding that procedural violations and lack of evidence warranted release on condition.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed by Ramcharan Verma under Section 483 of the CrPC in a case registered under Sections 8, 20 and 29 of the NDPS Act. The applicant contended that the recovery of 28.135 kg of ganja from a swift car, in which he was merely a passenger, was false and that the seizure violated mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act and the Seizure, Storage, Sampling and Disposal Rules, 2022. The State opposed bail but could not refute the applicant’s claim of procedural lapses, including lack of an independent witness, improper weighment, and absence of a forensic laboratory report. The Court observed that the procedural safeguards prescribed in Chapter V of the NDPS Act and Rules 8‑11 were not complied with, and that the applicant had been in custody for over three months with no prospect of a speedy trial. Consequently, the Court held that the applicant was entitled to bail, subject to a personal bond, two sureties, and conditions to appear in court, not tamper with evidence, and not intimidate witnesses.
Issues considered
- Whether the procedural requirements under the NDPS Act and its Rules were complied with in the seizure of the alleged narcotics.
- Whether the lack of an independent witness and forensic report justifies granting bail to the accused.
- Whether the accused poses a risk of tampering with evidence, influencing witnesses, or delaying the trial.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 483
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — s. 20, 29, 42, 50, 52A, 8
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (Seizure, Storage, Sampling and Disposal) Rules, 2022 — s. 10, 11, 8, 9
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- procedural violation
- seizure
- sampling rules
- false implication
- criminal procedure
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11268 of 2026
Ramcharan Verma
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sher Bahadur Yadav, Yogendra Nath
Yadav
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 64
HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J.
1. Learned AGA for the State submits that the instructions have been
received and he has no objection in case the bail application is decided on
merits.
2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri N.K.Sharma, learned
AGA for the State-opposite party.
3. The instant bail application, under Section 483 BNSS, has been filed with
a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 23 of 2026,
under Section 8/20/29 N.D.P.S. Act, Police Station- Kotwali Dehat, District
Mirzapur during the pendency of trial.
4. Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely
implicated in the present case. False recovery of 28.135 Kg. ganja (27
packets) has been shown from a Swift Car, which does not belong to the
applicant. The applicant had no concern with the alleged contraband being
ferried in the aforesaid car. The applicant was also one of the passenger.
There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. The alleged packets
of ganja were weighed along with the packing material. No accurate
scientific instruments were used for weighment. The mandatory provisions
of Sections 42, 50 and 52A of N.D.P.S. Act have not been complied with.
The procedure for sampling provided under Rule 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 FSL report to
establish that the substance recovered is ganja. Criminal history of the
BAIL No. 11268 of 2026
2
applicant has been explained in para 19 of the affidavit. The applicant is in
jail since 16.01.2026 and in case, he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse
the said liberty.
5. Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily
dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.
6. Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused 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 recovery. The
procedure for sampling provided under Rule 8, 9, 10 and 11 of the Narcotic
Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (Seizure, Storage, Sampling and
Disposal) Rules, 2022 have been violated. Moreover, the applicant has
remained confined for more than three months and after submission of
charge sheet 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
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 Ramcharan Verma 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 (Vivek Varma,J.)
Lbm/-
Digitally signed by :-
LAL BAHADUR MAURYA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…