MOHD FARMAN @ FARMAN PRADHANversusSTATE OF U.P.

          HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
                        - 2384 of 2026

Mohd Farman @ Farman Pradhan
                                                                .....Applicant(s)
                                     Versus

State of U.P.
                                                                    .....Opposite
                                                                          Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)      : Dharmendra Pratap Singh, Krishna
                                Deep Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 72
                 HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.

1. Heard Shri Dharmendra Pratap Singh along with Shri Krishna Deep
Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri B.P. Singh, learned A.G.A.
for the State and perused the record.

2. The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in
Case Crime no.442 of 2025, under Sections 8/20 of N.D.P.S. Act, Police
Station Hapur Dehat, District Hapur, with the prayer that in the event of
arrest, applicant may be released on bail.

3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant
is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further
submitted that nothing incriminating has been recovered from the physical /
conscious possession of the applicant and the name of the applicant has
surfaced in the confessional statement of four arrested co-accused persons,
namely, Amzad, Khushnood, Rahul and Anuj and from their possession,
224.240 Kg of contraband ganja is said to have been recovered. It is further
submitted that the above arrested co-accused persons have stated before the
Investigating Officer that they have purchased the same from one co-accused
Shah Alam. It is also submitted that the applicant is having no criminal
history. It was also submitted that applicant undertakes to co-operate during
trial and he would appear as and when required by the investigating agency
or Court. It has been stated that in case, applicant is granted anticipatory bail,
he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate with the
                                                       NABAIL No. 2384 of 2026
                                 2


investigation and would obey all conditions of bail.

4. On the other hand, learned AGA has opposed the application for
anticipatory bail and it has been submitted by him that the huge and
commercial quantity of contraband ganja has been recovered from the
possession of the co-accused and the name of the applicant has surfaced in
their confessional statement.

5. Nothing incriminating has been recovered from the physical / conscious
possession of the applicant and the name of the applicant has surfaced in the
confessional statement of four arrested co-accused persons, namely, Amzad,
Khushnood, Rahul and Anuj and from their possession, 224.240 Kg of
contraband ganja is said to have been recovered. The above arrested co-
accused persons have stated before the Investigating Officer that they have
purchased the same from one co-accused Shah Alam. It is also submitted
that the applicant is having no criminal history.

6. It may be stated that in case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State
of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694, it has been held by Hon'ble Supreme
Court that while deciding anticipatory bail, Court must consider nature and
gravity of accusation, antecedent of accused, possibility of accused to flee
from justice and that Court must evaluate entire available material against
the accused carefully and that the exact role of the accused has also to be
taken into consideration.

7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and all attending
facts and circumstances of the case and taking note of law laid down in the
case of Tofan Singh vs The State Of Tamil Nadu and the provisions of
Section 37 of N.D.P.S. Act and without expressing any opinion on merits, a
case for interim anticipatory bail is made out.

8. In the event of arrest of the applicant- Mohd Farman @ Farman
Pradhan involved in the aforesaid case crime shall be released on
anticipatory 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 tamper with evidence and that he would appear
                                                                                          NABAIL No. 2384 of 2026
                                                                   3


                                    before the trial Court on the date fixed unless exempted by the Court
                                    concerned;

                                    (ii) 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/her/them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any
                                    police officer;

                                    (iii) The applicant would co-operate during trial and would not misuse the
                                    liberty of bail.

                                    (iv) The applicant shall not leave India without prior permission of the
                                    Court concerned.

                                    10. In default of any of the conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty
                                    to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted
                                    to the applicant.



                                                                                    (Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)
                                    March 19, 2026
                                    RKM




Digitally signed by :-
RAJESH KUMAR MAURYA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad