Allahabad High Court

DHARMENDRA PALversusSTATE OF U.P.

Decided: 5 May 2026
Bench: YOGESH DUBEY JOINT REGISTRAR JUDICIAL

Holding

The court held that the applicant is entitled to bail.

Summary

The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of Dharmendra Pal, who was arrested in a NDNDPS case (Section 8/18) for possession of 629 grams of opium. The applicant argued that the quantity was below commercial threshold and that mandatory sampling provisions under Section 52‑A of the NDPS Act were not complied with, rendering the charge infirm. The State contended that all statutory requirements, including Sections 50 and 52‑A of the NDPS Act and Section 105 of the BNSS, had been satisfied. Relying on Section 37 of the NDPS Act and precedents set in Nadeem Ahmed v. State of West Bengal (2025) and Union of India v. Shiv Shanker Kesari (2007), the court found the case suitable for bail without commenting on the merits. Consequently, the bail application was allowed subject to a personal bond and several conditions.

Issues considered

Whether bail can be granted under Section 483 BNSS when the mandatory provisions of Section 52‑A NDPS Act regarding sample collection are alleged to be non‑compliant.
Whether the possession of 629 grams of opium, being below commercial quantity, warrants bail.
Whether compliance with Sections 50 and 52‑A of the NDPS Act and Section 105 BNSS is necessary for bail denial.

Legislation cited

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 105, 483
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act — s. 18, 37, 50, 52-A, 8

Subjects

bail
NDPS Act
Section 52-A
sample collection
commercial quantity
BNSS
pre‑trial detention

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14345 of 2026

Dharmendra Pal
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

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

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Jay Prakash Pandey, Umesh Chandra
Tiwari
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

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

1. Heard Sri Sudhanshu Tiwari, holding brief of Sri Umesh
Chandra Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri J.P.
Singh, 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.
105 of 2025, under Section 8/18 NDPS Act, registered at Police
Station Bisauli, District Budaun, during pendency of the trial.

3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that
applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this
case and he has been languishing in jail since 20.3.2026. It is
further submitted that as per FIR, 629 gram of opium is said to
have been recovered from the possession of the applicant which is
much below the commercial quantity, however, it is submitted that
mandatory provisions of Section 52-A of NDPS Act have not been
complied with as the samples have not been taken in accordance
with the Rules 9, 10 and 11 of the Rules published by the Union of
India in the official gazette and the same have not been certified by
the learned Magistrate. It is also submitted that the applicant
undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty, if granted. It has also
BAIL No. 14345 of 2026
2

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. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for
grant of bail to the applicant and it is submitted that mandatory
provisions of Sections 50 and 52-A of NDPS Act and Section 105
BNSS have been complied with.

5. As per FIR, 629 gram of opium is said to have been recovered
from the possession of the applicant which is much below the
commercial quantity, however, it is submitted that mandatory
provisions of Section 52-A of NDPS Act have not been complied
with as the samples have not been taken in accordance with the
Rules 9, 10 and 11 of the Rules published by the Union of India in
the official gazette and the same have not been certified by the
learned Magistrate.

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 the NDPS Act and in view of the law laid
down by Hon'ble Apex Court in Nadeem Ahmed vs. State of West
Bengal, 2025 LawSuit (SC) 1134 (2025 INSC 993) and in view of
the law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in Union of India vs. Shiv
Shanker Kesari, 2007 (7) SCC 798 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- Dharmendra Pal involved in the aforesaid case
crime 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 with the following conditions :-

(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.
BAIL No. 14345 of 2026
3

(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 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.)
May 6, 2026
Abhishek

Digitally signed by :-
ABHISHEK AGRAHARI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…