Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

ANIL SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P.

Decided

Holding

The Court held that bail is permissible in the present NDPS case and allowed the application.

Summary

The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of Anil Singh, who was arrested in a narcotics case under Sections 8 and 21 of the NDPS Act for allegedly possessing 400 g of heroin. The applicant claimed innocence, alleged non‑compliance with the mandatory provisions of Section 50 of the NDPS Act, and highlighted his long pre‑trial detention since 22 January 2025. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the offence. After reviewing the record and invoking Section 37 of the NDPS Act, the Court, without expressing an opinion on the merits, found the case suitable for bail. Accordingly, the Court granted bail on a personal bond of Rs 50,000 with two sureties, imposing standard conditions and clarifying that the order does not prejudice the trial’s merits.

Issues considered

  • Whether the bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, is maintainable in a case involving alleged possession of 400 g of heroin under the NDPS Act.
  • Whether the mandatory provisions of Section 50 of the NDPS Act have been complied with, affecting the right to bail.
  • Whether the seriousness of the offence and the applicant’s criminal history preclude the grant of bail.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • NDPS Act
  • narcotics
  • Section 50 compliance
  • pre‑trial detention
  • court conditions

Judgment

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
         CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12472 of 2025

Anil Singh
                                                            .....Applicant(s)
                                   Versus

State of U.P.
                                                                .....Opposite
                                                                      Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)                    :   Jitendra Pratap Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)               :   G.A.

Court No. - 69
                 HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.

1. Heard Shri Sudhir Kumar Singh, holding brief of Shri Jitendra Pratap
Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, and Shri S.D. Shukla, learned
AGA for the State-respondents and perused the record.

2. The present bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, has been filed on behalf of applicant, with a
prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 08 of 2025, under Section
8/21 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, registered at
Police Station Dubhad, District Ballia, during pendency of the trial.

3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the
applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case due to
ulterior motive. It is further submitted that 400 Gram of heroine is said to
have been recovered from the possession of the applicant. It is further
submitted that the mandatory provisions of Section 50 of N.D.P.S. Act
has not been complied with as is evident from the first information report,
itself, in which, it has been stated that no gazetted officer could be found.
The applicant is languishing in jail since 22.01.2025 and the applicant is
having criminal history of one case, which has been explained in the
memo of application, undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty, if
granted. It has also been pointed out that in the wake of heavy pendency
of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of
trial.

4. Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the
                                                         BAIL No. 12472 of 2025
                                2


applicant.

5. As per allegations in the first information report, 400 Gram of heroine
is said to have been recovered from the possession of the applicant. It is
further submitted that the mandatory provisions of Section 50 of N.D.P.S.
Act has not been complied with as is evident from the first information
report, itself, in which, it has been stated that no gazetted officer could be
found. The applicant is languishing in jail since 22.01.2025 and the
applicant is having criminal history of one case, which has been explained
in the memo of application.

6. Upon considering the totality of facts, nature and the evidence reflected
from record and also taking into consideration the provision of Section 37
of N.D.P.S. Act and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case,
I find it to be a fit case for bail. Hence, the present bail application is
allowed.

7. Let the applicant- Anil Singh involved in the aforesaid case crime shall
be released on 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 :-

(i) 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 from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police
officer or tamper with the evidence.

(ii) The applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution
witnesses.

(iii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on
the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii)
recording of statement under Section 351 of B.N.S.S.

(iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not
seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses
are present in the trial court.

(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date
                                                                                              BAIL No. 12472 of 2025
                                                                     3


                                    fixed, either personally or through his counsel.

                                    8. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for
                                    cancellation of bail.

                                    9. It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose of
                                    determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as
                                    an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely
                                    free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led
                                    unaffected by anything said in this order.




                                                                                       (Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)
                                    April 20, 2026
                                    RKM




Digitally signed by :-
RAJESH KUMAR MAURYA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.