Allahabad High Court
LAVKUSH YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA
Holding
Bail is granted because the seizure procedure violated Section 52A of the NDPS Act and the applicant is similarly situated to a co‑accused already released on bail.
Summary
Lavkush Yadav was arrested for allegedly transporting 24.5 kg of ganja and filed a bail application in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 15137 of 2026. He argued that he was falsely implicated, had no prior criminal record, and that the seizure procedure violated Section 52A of the NDPS Act because samples were mixed without a magistrate’s presence. The State opposed bail but could not dispute that a similarly situated co‑accused, Ranjeet Yadav, had already been granted bail. The court noted the procedural irregularity in sample preparation and the parity with the co‑accused, finding a prima facie case for bail. Consequently, the court allowed the bail application, directing the applicant to execute a personal bond with two sureties and comply with standard bail conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether the procedural requirements of Section 52A of the NDPS Act were complied with in the seizure and sampling of the contraband.
- Whether the applicant is entitled to bail on the same footing as the similarly situated co‑accused who was granted bail.
- Whether the applicant’s lack of antecedents and the alleged procedural lapse justify the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — s. 20, 29, 52A, 60, 8
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- Section 52A
- procedural lapse
- co‑accused parity
- drug trafficking
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15137 of 2026
Lavkush Yadav
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Prateek Srivastava
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 72
HON'BLE RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA, J.
1. Heard, Learned counsel for the applicant, Learned A.G.A. for the State
and perused the record.
2. The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the
applicant on bail in Case Crime No.62 of 2026, under Sections 8/20/29/60
N.D.P.S. Act, Police Station- Raipur, District- Sonbhadra.
3. The Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has
been falsely implicated in the present case. He contends that the applicant
was arrested while supposedly carrying 24.500 kilograms of Ganja in a
sack tied to the back of his motor cycle which was allegedly being driven
by him. The Learned counsel for the applicant further contends that the
similarly situated co-accused viz. Ranjeet Yadav, who was supposedly
driving carrying 24.500 kilograms of Ganja and was arrested at the same
time when the applicant is said to have been arrested, has been granted
regular bail by this Court vide its order dated 5.5.2026 passed in
Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 15074 of 2026 (Ranjeet Yadav Vs.
State of U.P.). The case of the applicant is at par with that of the co-
accused. He further contends that mandatory provision of Section 52A of
the N.D.P.S. Act have not been complied with. He further contends that
the recoveries effected from the three separate vehicles were improperly
mixed together in contravention of the prescribed procedure for drawing
samples and preserving the seized contraband. The applicant has no
criminal antecedents and he is in jail since 09.04.2026.
BAIL No. 15137 of 2026
2
4. The Learned A.G.A., on the other hand, has opposed the prayer for
grant of bail, however, could not dispute the fact that similarly situated
co-accused Ranjit Yaday, who was arrested along with the applicant
supposedly carrying 24.400 kilograms of Ganja in the dickey of his
vehicle, has already been enlarged on bail by this Court.
5. I have considered the submissions made by the Learned counsels for
the parties and perused the material brought on the record.
6. A perusal of the First Information Report indicates that separate
recoveries were made from three separate vehicles. After the recoveries
were made, a homogeneous mixture was prepared by drawing samples
from the recoveries, which was done without the presence of a Magistrate
as is mandatory under Section 52A of the NDPS Act.
7. Taking into account all the facts and circumstances of the case, as also
the fact that similarly situated co-accused Ranjit Yadav has been granted
bail by this Court, prima facie, a case for bail is made out.
8. The bail application is allowed.
9. Let the accused-applicant- Lavkush Yadav, involved in above
mentioned case crime number be released on bail, on his executing a
personal bond and two reliable sureties each, in the like amount to the
satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:
i. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence.
ii. The applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity.
iii. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses
and co-operate in the trial.
iv. The applicant will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the
trial court, unless his personal appearance is exempted by the court
concerned.
BAIL No. 15137 of 2026
3
10. In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the court
below will be at liberty to proceed to cancel his bail.
11. It is made clear that the applicant shall be released on the basis of
computer generated copy of this order, downloaded from the official
website of High Court Allahabad and verified by the concerned counsel
with the undertaking that the certified copy will be filed within 15 days.
12. It is further directed that the trial court shall send the release order to
the concerned jail through Bail Order Management System (BOMS) to
ensure early release of the applicant.
13. The observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the
instant bail application and are not to be considered to be an opinion on
the merits of the case.
(Rajiv Lochan Shukla,J.)
May 12, 2026
Sachin
Digitally signed by :-
SACHIN TIWARI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…