Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

RAJU KHANversusSTATE OF U.P.

Decided

Holding

The bail application is allowed, and the applicant is released on personal bond and sureties subject to conditions.

Summary

The applicant, Raju Khan, filed a bail application in a criminal case (Crime No. 277 of 2026) under Sections 8 and 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, alleging possession of a quantity below commercial threshold. The court examined the nature of the offence, the severity of the prescribed punishment, the absence of independent public witnesses, the pending chemical analyst report, and the applicant's explained criminal history. Considering these factors, the court found the case suitable for bail. Consequently, the court ordered the release of the applicant on personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions of non‑tampering with evidence, non‑intimidation of witnesses, and regular appearance before the trial court. The court warned that breach of any condition would lead to cancellation of bail, and the observations would not affect the trial on merits.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail should be granted in an NDPS case involving sections 8 and 20 when the alleged quantity is below commercial threshold
  • Whether the lack of independent public witnesses and the pending chemical analyst report justify bail
  • Whether the applicant's criminal history, explained before the court, affects the bail decision

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • NDPS Act
  • Section 8
  • Section 20
  • low quantity
  • criminal procedure
  • sureties
  • evidence tampering

Judgment

                                                     HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

                                                CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27610 of 2026

                                    Raju Khan
                                                                                                              .....Applicant(s)
                                                                             Versus
                                    State of U.P.
                                                                                                         .....Opposite Party(s)

                                    Counsel for Applicant(s)                                       :     Mohd. Irfan
                                    Counsel for Opposite Party(s)                                  :     G.A.

                                    Court No. - 68
                                    (Sl. No. 76 out of 115)

                                                                HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.

                                    1. List has been revised.

                                    2. Heard Ms. Aasiya Parveen, Advocate holding brief of Sri Mohd. Irfan, learned
                                    counsel for the applicant and Sri Yogesh Mishra, learned State Law Officer and also
                                    perused the material placed on record.

                                    3. By means of the present application, the applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.
                                     277 of 2026, under Sections 8/20 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances
                                    Act, 1985 Police Station - Civil Lines, District - Rampur, during the pendency of
                                    trial.

                                    4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned
                                    counsel for the parties, nature of offence, severity of punishment and also considering
                                    the fact that the alleged recovery is below the commercial quantity, there is a lack of
                                    independent public witnesses to support the recovery, the chemical analyst report is
                                    not yet on record coupled with fact that criminal history assigned to the applicant has
                                    been explained, this Court prima facie finds it a fit case to release the applicant on
                                    bail.

                                    5. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant- Raju Khan, be
                                    released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties to the satisfaction of
                                    the court concerned, subject to verification of sureties, with the conditions that he shall
                                    not tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses and shall appear before the trial
                                    court as required.

                                    6. Breach of any condition shall entail cancellation of bail. The observations herein
                                    shall not affect the trial on merits.

                                    September 17, 2026
                                    Siddhant

                                                                                                          (Krishan Pahal,J.)




Digitally signed by :-
SIDDHANT SAHU
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.