Allahabad High Court
PRABHAT KHAREversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
Holding
The court held that, in view of the nature of the offence, the co‑accused’s release on bail, the applicant’s clean record and the Supreme Court guidelines, the applicant is entitled to bail.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed by Prabhat Khare in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 33704 of 2026, relating to charges under several sections of the B.N.S. and the NDPS Act for alleged receipt and sale of codeine‑based cough syrup. The applicant argued that he was not a partner in the concerned firm, that no documentary evidence linked him to the consignment, and that his co‑accused had already been released on bail. The State opposed bail but did not dispute the factual matrix. The Court, referring to Supreme Court precedents (Kapil Wadhawan v. CBI, Maya Tiwari v. State of U.P.) and its own guidelines, noted the nature of the offence, the applicant’s clean record, the co‑accused’s bail, and the problem of overcrowded jails. It concluded that bail should be granted without expressing an opinion on the merits. Accordingly, the application was allowed subject to standard bail conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted to the accused under the NDPS and B.N.S. provisions given the nature of the alleged offence and the evidence.
- Whether the release of a co‑accused on bail influences the grant of bail to the applicant.
- Whether the absence of documentary proof of the applicant’s involvement and his lack of partnership in the firm affect the bail decision.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- codeine cough syrup
- narcotic drugs
- criminal procedure
- overcrowded prisons
- co‑accused bail
- Supreme Court precedent
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33704 of 2026
Prabhat Khare
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Kshitij Pandey, Rakesh Pathak,
Vidhigya Pathak
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 66
HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR SINGH DESHWAL, J.
1. Heard Sri Rakesh Pathak, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Nitesh
Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
2. The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the
applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 0087 of 2025, under Sections 340(2),
336(3), 338, 318(4), 132, 61(2) B.N.S. and Section 8, 21C, 26, 27(a)
N.D.P.S. Act, Police Station Collectorganj, District Kanpur Nagar, during
the pendency of the trial.
3. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that, as per the
prosecution story, the applicant used to receive the codeine-based cough
syrup sent by Shriram Enterprises, Kanpur, at the shop of one Anand
Kumar Verma, Lakhimpur, which was sent in the name of Dhruv
Enterprises, a proprietorship concern of the applicant. It further transpired
during the investigation that after receiving the consignment of codeine-
based cough syrup from Sri Ram Enterprises, the applicant used to sell
the same in the open market and deposit the money in the account of Sri
Ram Enterprises. It is further submitted that the wife of the applicant as
well as the wife of the proprietor of Sri Ram Enterprises are partners in
Dhruv Enterprises. The applicant is neither a partner nor the competent
person mentioned in the drug licence of Dhruv Enterprises, and the
applicant has been falsely implicated merely because he is the husband of
one of the partners of Dhruv Enterprises. It is further submitted that the
police have not recovered any document which was signed by the
BAIL No. 33704 of 2026
2
applicant acknowledging the receipt of the consignment of codeine-based
cough syrup, either on behalf of Dhruv Enterprises or on behalf of Rama
Enterprises, and no money regarding the aforesaid transaction was also
deposited in the account of the applicant.
4. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that co-
accused Shivam Agarwal has already been released on bail by a
coordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.
31670 of 2026 vide order dated 17.09.2026. Therefore, the applicant,
being on a better footing, is also entitled to be released on bail. It is
further submitted that the applicant has no criminal history. It is also
submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case;
therefore, there is no requirement for custodial interrogation. The
applicant is a law-abiding citizen and has been languishing in jail since
12.03.2026. In case he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of
bail and will cooperate in the trial proceedings.
5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail
but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.
6. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions
of learned counsel for the parties and taking into account the fact that the
co-accused has been released on bail and keeping in view the nature of
offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and taking into account
overcrowded jails and heavy pendency of criminal cases before the trial
courts as well as considering the mandate of the judgement of the Apex
Court in the case of Kapil Wadhawan vs Central Bureau of
Investigation reported in 2025 SCC OnLine SC 3038 as well as
guideline of this Court in the case of Maya Tiwari Vs. State of U.P.,
2024 SCC Online All 6765 regarding grant of bail and without
expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that
the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. Accordingly, the present
application is allowed.
7. Let the applicant- Prabhat Khare, involved in the aforementioned
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,
BAIL No. 33704 of 2026
3
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 cooperate in the trial/investigation sincerely without
seeking any adjournment.
iii. The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission
of any crime after being released on bail.
iv. The applicant shall attend in accordance with the conditions of the
bond executed by him.
8. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for
cancellation of bail.
9. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be
verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
10. Verification of mobile number and Aadhaar card of the applicant as
well as sureties should be verified by the court concerned.
11. It is made clear that the applicant shall be released on the basis of
computer generated copy of this order, downloaded from the official
website of High Court Allahabad and verified by the concerned counsel
with the undertaking that the certified copy will be filed within 15 days.
12. It is further directed that the trial court shall send the release order to
the concerned jail through Bail Order Management System (BOMS) to
ensure early release of the applicant.
13. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the applicant through
Jail Superintendent, Kanpur Nagar via e-mail or on e-prison portal and
Trial Court via e-mode within 24 hours in compliance of the order of the
Apex Court in the case of Policy Strategy for Grant of Bail, In Re: Suo
Motu Writ Petition (Crl.) No.4 of 2021 decided on 31.01.2023 reported
BAIL No. 33704 of 2026
4
in (2024) 10 SCC 685 as well as Pila Pahan@Peela Pahan and others
Vs. State of Jharkhand and another, in Writ Petition (Criminal) No.
169 of 2025, decided on 29.05.2026.
14. Application, if any, stands disposed of.
(Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal,J.)
September 30, 2026
SA
Digitally signed by :-
SALMAN ALI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…