Allahabad High Court
JAMEEL AHMADversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
Holding
The court held that the applicant is entitled to bail in the NDPS case.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of Jameel Ahmad, who was arrested in a NDPS case (Crime No. 186 of 2026) for alleged possession of 514 g of charas, a quantity below the commercial threshold. The applicant claimed innocence, no prior criminal record, and argued that the seized drug was in his exclusive possession, while the State contended that the mandatory provisions of Sections 50 and 52‑A of the NDPS Act had been satisfied, justifying denial of bail. The Court examined the facts, the low quantity involved, and the provisions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, and, without expressing an opinion on the merits, concluded that the case was suitable for bail. Accordingly, the Court ordered the release of the applicant on a personal bond of Rs 50,000 with two sureties, subject to strict conditions regarding non‑interference with witnesses and attendance at trial dates. The order expressly limited its effect to the bail application and did not prejudice the trial court’s independent assessment of the evidence.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in a NDPS case involving possession of a quantity of charas below the commercial threshold.
- Whether the compliance with mandatory provisions of Sections 50 and 52‑A of the NDPS Act bars the grant of bail.
- Whether the applicant’s lack of prior criminal history and the low quantity of seized narcotic justify bail despite the seriousness of the offence.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 483
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act — s. 20, 29, 37, 50, 52-A, 8
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- charas
- quantity below commercial threshold
- Section 37 NDPS
- Section 483 B.N.S.S.
- criminal procedure
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16704 of 2026
Jameel Ahmad
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Amar Bahadur Maurya
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 69
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.
1. Heard Sri A.K. Maurya, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri
Radhey Shyam, 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.
186 of 2026, under Section 8/20/29 NDPS Act, registered at Police
Station Hafizganj, District Bareilly, 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 10.4.2026. It is
further submitted that 514gram of charas which is much below the
commercial quantity is said to have been recovered from exclusive
and separate possession of the applicant and 515gram of charas is
said to have been recovered from the possession of co-accused
Maisar. 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 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
BAIL No. 16704 of 2026
2
grant of bail to the applicant and it is submitted that mandatory
provisions of Sections 50 and 52-A of NDPS Act have been
complied with.
5. As per allegation in the FIR, 514gram of charas which is much
below the commercial quantity is said to have been recovered from
exclusive and separate possession of the applicant and the
applicant is having no criminal history.
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 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- Jameel Ahmad 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.
(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
BAIL No. 16704 of 2026
3
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 18, 2026
Abhishek
Digitally signed by :-
ABHISHEK AGRAHARI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…