Allahabad High Court
NEERAJ VATS @ NEERUversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
Holding
The court held that, notwithstanding the large quantity of narcotics, the case is fit for bail and allowed the bail application.
Summary
The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of Neeraj Vats, who was arrested in a NDPS case involving the alleged recovery of 182 kg of ganja from a container shared with co‑accused. The applicant claimed false implication, pointed to the lack of any personal possession, his clean criminal record, and the fact that a co‑accused had already been granted bail. The State argued that the mandatory provisions of Sections 50 and 52A of the NDPS Act had been complied with, justifying denial of bail. The Court, relying on Section 37 of the NDPS Act and precedents (Union of India v. Shiv Shanker Kesari, 2007; Nadeem Ahmad v. State of West Bengal, 2025), held that the case was fit for bail and ordered release on a personal bond of Rs 50,000 with two sureties and several conditions. The order expressly limited its effect to the bail application and did not comment on the merits of the trial.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted under Section 483 B.N.S.S. for an offence under the NDPS Act involving a large quantity of narcotics.
- Whether the mandatory provisions of Sections 50 and 52A of the NDPS Act have been complied with, thereby affecting the bail decision.
- Whether the applicant’s lack of prior criminal record and the bail granted to a co‑accused justify granting bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 351, 483
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act — s. 20, 37, 50, 52A, 8
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- narcotics
- Section 483 B.N.S.S.
- Section 37 NDPS
- mandatory provisions
- co‑accused bail
- large quantity seizure
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33079 of 2025
Neeraj Vats @ Neeru
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Narendra Kumar, Yogendra Pal Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 69
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.
1. Heard Sri Narendra Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Shiv Dutt Shukla,
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. 415 of 2025 under Section 8/20 NDPS Act, registered at Police
Station Phase-2, District Gautam Budh Nagar, during pendency of the trial.
3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant has been
falsely implicated in this case and co-accused Himanshu Jatav has been granted bail
by this Court vide order dated 23.3.2026 passed in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No.
33163 of 2025. It is further submitted that 182 kg of ganja is said to have been
recovered from joint possession of the applicant and four co-accused persons and
mandatory provisions of sections 50 and 52A of NDPS Act have not been complied
with. It is further submitted that the applicant has no criminal history to his credit and
he is in jail since 29.8.2025. 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 section 52A NDPS Act have been
complied with and the alleged recovery has been made from the container in
compliance of section 50 NDPS Act.
5. 182 kg of ganja is said to have been recovered from a container in which the
applicant and three other accused persons were travelling. Applicant and two accused
persons were arrested and fourth accused person is said to have fled away and nothing
is said to have been recovered from conscious possession of the applicant as the
alleged contraband is said to have been recovered from joint possession of the
BAIL No. 33079 of 2025
2
applicant and other accused persons. The applicant has no criminal history to his
credit and he is in jail since 29.8.2025.
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 in view of
the law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in Union of India vs. Shiv Shanker
Kesari, 2007 (7) SCC 798 and Nadeem Ahmad vs. State of West Bengal 2025
LawSuit (SC) 1134 (2025 INSC 993), 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 Neeraj Vats @ Neeru 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 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.
April 23, 2026
Madhurima
(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
MADHURIMA GARG
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…