Allahabad High Court
GULISTAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
Holding
The Court held that anticipatory bail may be granted despite the applicant’s inclusion in a confessional statement, provided strict conditions are imposed, following the Sushila Aggarwal precedent.
Summary
The applicant Gulista applied for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the CrPC in a case under Sections 8, 21, 29 and 60 of the NDPS Act, where she was named only in the confessional statement of a co‑accused and no contraband was recovered from her. The State opposed the bail, arguing the seriousness of the offence. The Court, without delving into the merits, held that the applicant is entitled to anticipatory bail until a charge‑sheet is filed, relying on the Supreme Court’s Sushila Aggarwal decision. Bail was granted subject to a personal bond, two sureties and six specific conditions, including cooperation with police and non‑tampering with evidence. The order also directed the recording of the applicant’s Aadhaar and contact details on the CCTNS portal as per the 2026 Uttar Pradesh electronic rules. The application was disposed with the bail order.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in an NDPS case where the accused is implicated solely through a co‑accused’s confessional statement and no material evidence is recovered.
- Whether the gravity of the alleged offence and the applicant’s antecedents preclude the grant of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the conditions imposed under Section 482 CrPC and the Supreme Court precedent are sufficient to safeguard the investigation.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 482
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act — s. 21, 29, 60, 8
- Uttar Pradesh Electronic Processes (Issuance, Service and Execution) Rules, 2026 — s. Rule 8
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- NDPS Act
- Section 482 CrPC
- confessional statement
- bail conditions
- Supreme Court precedent
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
- 3680 of 2026
Gulista
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Atmaram Nadiwal, Dinesh Kumar Yadav
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 67
HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR SINGH DESHWAL, J.
1. Heard Sri Atmaram Nadiwal, learned counsel for the applicant, learned
AGA for the State and perused the record.
2. The present application has been filed by the applicant seeking bail in
anticipation of her arrest in Case Crime No. 40 of 2026, under Section 8/21
and Section 29/60 of N.D.P.S. Act, Police Station- Mirzapur, District-
Saharanpur.
3. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that, though there is no
recovery of any contraband article from the possession of the applicant, her
name has surfaced as an accused in the confessional statement of the co-
accused Mesor, who was arrested by the police along with contraband
articles; the applicant has not committed any offence and has been falsely
implicated in the present case; the applicant has explained the criminal
history of one case; therefore, no case is made out against the applicant.
4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.
5. Thus, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and
considering the nature of accusations, gravity of offence and antecedents of
applicants, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to get
anticipatory bail till submission of charge sheet under Section 193 BNSS as
per the Constitution Bench judgment of the Apex Court in the case of
Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98.
6. In the event of arrest, the applicant Gulista involved in the aforesaid
crime be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond and two
NABAIL No. 3680 of 2026
2
sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the investigating officer
concerned with the following conditions:-
(i) The applicant shall make herself available for interrogation by a police
officer as and when required;
(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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;
(iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of
the Court;
(iv) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by
intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation.
(v) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of
any crime after being released on bail.
(vi) At the time of releasing the applicant on anticipatory bail, after
verification, the concerned Investigating Officer shall also record the
Aadhaar number, WhatsApp number, e-mail ID, and mobile number of the
applicant, and the same shall be uploaded on CCTNS, as per Rule 8 of the
Uttar Pradesh Electronic Processes (Issuance, Service and Execution) Rules,
2026.
7. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for
cancellation of anticipatory bail.
8. With the aforesaid observations/directions, the application stands
disposed of.
(Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal,J.)
April 20, 2026
SA
Digitally signed by :-
SALMAN ALI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…