Allahabad High Court
AMAN CHAUDHARI @ CHHOTUversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
Holding
The court found the case fit for bail and allowed the bail application with conditions.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of Aman Chaudhari, who was arrested in a NDPS case (Sections 8, 20, 29, 60) for alleged possession of 490.745 kg of ganja recovered from a co-accused's tractor. The applicant contended that he was falsely implicated, that no contraband was found on him, and that the confessional statement of the co-accused could not be used against him per the Supreme Court's decision in Toofan Singh v. State of Tamil Nadu. The prosecution argued that the applicant had a prior IPC case (Sections 504, 506) and posed a risk of tampering with evidence. After weighing the evidence, the seriousness of the offence, and the statutory provisions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, the court held that the case was suitable for bail. Consequently, the bail application was allowed subject to a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 and several conditions to prevent intimidation of witnesses and tampering with evidence.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted to an accused under the NDPS Act for a large quantity of narcotics when the only link is a co-accused's confessional statement.
- Whether the applicant's alleged prior criminal history under the IPC affects the bail decision.
- Whether the confessional statement of a co-accused is admissible against another accused under the precedent set by Toofan Singh v. State of Tamil Nadu.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 483
- Indian Penal Code — s. 504, 506
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act — s. 20, 29, 37, 60, 8
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- confessional statement
- Section 483 B.N.S.S.
- criminal history
- large quantity narcotics
- conditions of bail
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14603 of 2026
Aman Chaudhari @ Chhotu
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Aishwarya Pratap Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 69
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.
1. Heard Sri Aishwarya Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the
applicant and Sri B.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. 62
of 2026, under Section 8/20 and 29/60 NDPS Act, registered at
Police Station Iglas, District Aligarh, 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 7.4.2026. It is
further submitted that nothing has been recovered from the
possession of the applicant and his name has surfaced in the
confessional statement of arrested co-accused Pushpendra. It is
submitted that as per FIR, 490.745kg of ganja is said to have been
recovered from a tractor which was stationed outside of the house
of the co-accused Pushpendra. It is further submitted that in view
of the law laid down by Hon’ble Apex Court in Toofan Singh vs.
State of Tamil Nadu, 2021 (4) SCC 1, confessional statement of an
accused is not admissible against another accused. It is further
submitted that applicant is having no criminal history. It is also
submitted that the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the
BAIL No. 14603 of 2026
2
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. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for
grant of bail to the applicant and it is submitted that the applicant is
having criminal history of one case relating to the offence under
Sections 504 and 506 IPC. In reply, learned counsel for the
applicant submits that final report in the said case has been
submitted against the applicant.
5. Nothing is said to have been recovered from the possession of
the applicant and his name has surfaced in the confessional
statement of arrested co-accused Pushpendra. As per FIR,
490.745kg of ganja is said to have been recovered from a tractor
which was stationed outside of the house of the co-accused
Pushpendra.
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 Toofan Singh vs. State of Tamil
Nadu (supra) 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- Aman Chaudhari @ Chhotu 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. 14603 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 7, 2026
Abhishek
Digitally signed by :-
ABHISHEK AGRAHARI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…