Allahabad High Court
MOHD ARIFversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
Holding
The court held that the low quantity of opium and the applicant’s clean NDPS record make the case fit for bail under Section 483 BNSS despite the mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of Mohd Arif, who was arrested in a narcotics case under Sections 8 and 18 of the NDPS Act for allegedly possessing 1.023 kg of opium, a quantity below the commercial threshold. The applicant argued that he was falsely implicated, had no prior NDPS conviction, and had been in custody since 15 April 2026, while the State contended that mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act and Section 105 of the BNSS had been satisfied. The court examined the facts, the low quantity of the drug, and the absence of a prior NDPS record, and, applying Section 37 of the NDPS Act, concluded that the case was suitable for bail. Without expressing any view on the merits, the court granted bail subject to a personal bond of Rs 50,000 with two sureties and several conditions. The order clarified that it was limited to the bail application and did not prejudice the trial court’s independent assessment.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in a case governed by the NDPS Act.
- Whether the mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act and Section 105 of the BNSS preclude bail when the seized quantity is below commercial quantity.
- Whether the applicant’s lack of prior NDPS conviction and the circumstances of detention justify bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 105, 483
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — s. 18, 37, 8
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- opium
- commercial quantity
- Section 483 BNSS
- Section 37 NDPS
- criminal procedure
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15549 of 2026
Mohd Arif
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Pankaj Satsangi
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 69
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.
1. Heard Sri Pankaj Satsangi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Manoj Gautam,
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. 89 of 2026 under Section 8/18 NDPS Act, registered at Police
Station Binawar, District Budaun during pendency of the trial.
3. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant has been
falsely implicated in this case and 1.023 kg of Opium is said to have been recovered
from the possession of the applicant which is much below the commercial quantity. It
is further submitted that criminal history of the applicant has been explained in the
memo of application and he is languishing in jail since15.4.2026. It is also submitted
that the applicant 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. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the
applicant and submits that mandatory provisions of NDPS Act and section 105 BNSS
have been complied with.
5. As per the FIR, 1.023 kg of Opium which is much below the commercial quantity is
said to have been recovered from the possession of the applicant. Applicant has no
criminal history of NDPS Act and he is in jail since 15.4.2026.
6. Upon considering the totality of facts, nature and evidence reflected from record,
taking into consideration the provision of Section 37 of the NDPS 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 Mohd. Arif involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on
BAIL No. 15549 of 2026
2
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.
(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.
May 7, 2026
Madhurima
(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
MADHURIMA GARG
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…