Allahabad High Court
SHIVMANGALversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- KRISHAN PAHAL
Holding
The court granted bail to the applicant, finding that the case for bail was made out on a prima facie basis.
Summary
Shivmangal applied for bail in a NDNDPS case (Sections 8, 20 and 60) where he was alleged to be the intended recipient of contraband. The applicant claimed innocence, stating that the only link to the case was a confessional statement of a co‑accused, which the court held has no evidentiary value. The co‑accused, who was arrested on the spot, had already been granted bail. The applicant’s prior criminal case was explained and did not preclude bail. The court found that the bail application was made out on a prima facie basis and ordered his release on personal bond and sureties, subject to standard conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to an accused under Sections 8, 20 and 60 of the NDPS Act when the only evidence is a co‑accused’s confessional statement.
- Whether the applicant’s prior criminal history bars bail.
Legislation cited
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act — s. 20, 60, 8
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- confessional statement
- evidentiary value
- criminal antecedents
- sureties
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33006 of 2026
Shivmangal
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Anil Kumar Srivastava, Rashid Ali
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 68
(Sl. No.45 out of 291)
HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Yathartha Srivastava, learned Advocate holding brief for Sri
Rashid Ali, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri A.K. Mishra, learned
A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.
3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 0111 of 2026, under Sections
8/20/60 NDPS Act, Police Station Pannuganj, District Sonbhadra, during the
pendency of trial.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is
absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He is
stated to be the person to whom the said contraband was destined to be
supplied. He was not arrested on the spot. His name has come up in the
confessional statement of the co-accused person, which has no evidentiary
value in the eyes of law. The co-accused person, who was arrested on the
spot has been granted bail, as such, applicant is also entitled for bail.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant has further argued that there is a
criminal history of one case assigned to the applicant, which stands
explained. The applicant is languishing in jail since 25.8.2026 and he is
ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he
will not misuse the liberty of bail.
6. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application but the
BAIL No. 33006 of 2026
2
submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant could not be
disputed.
7. This Court is of the view that if a case for bail is otherwise made out,
an accused cannot be kept incarcerated solely on account of his criminal
antecedents. In the instant case, the criminal history assigned to the
applicant has been properly explained.
8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by
learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into
consideration the fact that the name of applicant has come up in the
confessional statement of the co-accused person, which has no evidentiary
value in the eyes of law and that the co-accused person, who was arrested on
the spot has already been enlarged on bail and without expressing any
opinion on the merits of the case, prima-facie the Court is of the view that
the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.
9. Let the applicant- Shivmangal, who is involved in aforementioned case
crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties
each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to
verification of sureties, with the condition that he shall not tamper with
evidence or intimidate witnesses and shall appear before the trial court as
required.
10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for
cancellation of bail.
11. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant
shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent
opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.
(Krishan Pahal,J.)
September 16, 2026
Shalini
Digitally signed by :-
SHALINI JAISWAL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…