Allahabad High Court
SANJAY YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
Holding
The applicant is entitled to bail as he is not directly implicated in the offence and the circumstances warrant his release.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed by Sanjay Yadav, who was alleged to be involved in the illegal transport of codeine‑based cough syrup concealed in a DCM vehicle. The FIR named the DCM owner and driver, but not Yadav, who merely provided a transport service. The applicant argued that he had no role in the smuggling, had no criminal record, and the charge‑sheet had already been filed, making custodial interrogation unnecessary. The State opposed bail but could not dispute the factual background. Relying on principles of bail, the overcrowding of prisons, and precedents such as Kapil Wadhawan v CBI and Maya Tiwari v State of U.P., the Court held that Yadav was entitled to bail and ordered his release on personal bond with conditions. The bail application was therefore allowed.
Issues considered
- The applicability of bail in an NDPS case where the accused is not named in the FIR but is alleged to have facilitated transport.
- Whether the filing of a charge‑sheet obviates the need for custodial interrogation for bail considerations.
- Whether the applicant’s lack of prior criminal record and the principle of avoiding overcrowded jails justify granting bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 318(4), 319(2), 336(3), 338, 340(2), 61(2)
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act — s. 21, 29, 8
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- false implication
- transport service
- overcrowded prisons
- precedent
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33975 of 2026
Sanjay Yadav
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Abhishek Yadav, Ajay Yadav, Santosh
Kumar Jaiswal, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 66
HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR SINGH DESHWAL, J.
1. Heard Sri Akhilesh Singh, Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Ajay Yadav,
learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Nitesh Kumar Srivastava, learned
A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
2. Instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the
applicant on bail during the trial in Case Crime No.416 of 2025, under
Sections 8/21/29 of N.D.P.S. Act and Section 319(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3),
340(2), 61(2) of B.N.S., Police Station -Chunar, District- Mirzapur.
3. Counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant was not named in
the FIR wherein allegation has been made that one DCM No. MH 14 HG
0083 was intercepted by the police while it was transporting bags of paddy
straw, and on checking, the bags bottles of Onerex 100 ml cough syrup
manufactured by Wingsbiotech LLP were found concealed inside the paddy
straw. A total of 8300 bottles (each 100ml) of cough syrup were recovered
from the DCM vehicle in question. It is further submitted that on the spot
Khalasi of the DCM, Sunil Kumar Vairagi was arrested, while its
driver/owner Sahil Khan, who was also driving the DCM escaped from the
spot.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has
been falsely implicated merely because DCM No. MH 14 HG 0083 was
booked through his transport service namely Shree Shyam Raod Lines,
Kanpur though the applicant is not concerned with the actual luggage which
is to be transported as owner of the DCM himself driving the DCM,
BAIL No. 33975 of 2026
2
therefore, there is no material regarding involvement of applicant in illegal
transportation of Onerex codeine based cough syrup. It is further submitted
that Khalasi of the DCM Sunil Kmar Vairagi has been released on bail by
this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.39018 of 2025 vide order
dated 01.09.2026. Therefore, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
It is lastly submitted that the charge sheet has been filed, therefore, there is
no requirement for custodial interrogation.The applicant has no criminal
history and and he is languishing in jail since 13.06.2026.
5. Learned AGA for the State 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 keeping in view the nature of offence,
evidence, complicity of 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. reported in 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- Sanjay Yadav 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, 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
BAIL No. 33975 of 2026
3
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 as well as Aadhaar Card of the applicant
and sureties should also be conducted by the court concerned.
11. It is made clear that the applicant shall be released on the basis of
downloaded copy of this order 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 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
Mirzapur Jail Superintendent via e-mail or e-prison portal and Trial Court
via e-mode within 24 hours in compliance of the orders 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 in (2024) 10
SCC 685 as well as in the case of 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.
October 1, 2026
A.Kr.
(Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
AJAY KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…