Allahabad High Court
BALLU KHANversusUNION OF INDIA AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- KRISHAN PAHAL
Holding
The court granted bail to the applicant, finding insufficient evidence to justify continued detention.
Summary
Ballu Khan applied for bail in a case under Sections 8 and 20 of the NDPS Act, alleging false implication and lack of substantive evidence. The applicant's only incriminating material was a confessional statement, which the counsel argued is inadmissible. The court examined the nature of the accusation, the severity of the prescribed punishment, and the absence of corroborative evidence. Finding the case prima facie suitable for bail, the court ordered release on personal bond and sureties, subject to standard conditions. The bail order does not prejudice the trial on merits.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted in a case under Sections 8/20 of the NDPS Act where the only evidence is an inadmissible confessional statement
- Whether the applicant's alleged lack of substantive evidence warrants release pending trial
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- confessional statement
- evidentiary value
- criminal procedure
- presumption of innocence
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 32464 of 2026
Ballu Khan
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
Union Of India And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Vinay Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : A.S.G.I., Anant Kumar Tiwari, G.A.
Court No. - 68
(Sl. No. 08 out of 98)
HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Vinay Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Anant
Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Anit Kumar
Shukla, learned A.G.A. for the State and also perused the material placed on
record.
3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 25 of 2026, under Sections 8/20
of NDPS Act, Police Station - Karanda, District - Ghazipur, during the
pendency of trial.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is innocent
and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do
with the said offence as alleged in the FIR. There is no evidence against the
applicant except his own confessional statement which has no evidentiary
value in the eyes of law. There is no previous criminal history of the
applicant except one case foisted on him at the time of his arrest. He is in jail
since 8.4.2026.
5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions
advanced by the learned counsel for the respective parties, the nature of the
accusation, the severity of the punishment prescribed, and also taking into
account the lack of substantive evidence and the legal inadmissibility of the
confessional statement, this Court prima facie finds it a fit case to release the
applicant on bail.
BAIL No. 32464 of 2026
2
6. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant- Ballu
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.
7. Breach of any condition shall entail cancellation of bail. The observations
herein shall not affect the trial on merits.
September 14, 2026
Siddhant
(Krishan Pahal,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
SIDDHANT SAHU
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…