SABIRversusSTATE OF U.P.

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
                        - 9120 of 2026

Sabir
                                                            .....Applicant(s)
                                   Versus

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

Counsel for Applicant(s)             :   Mohd. Naushad, Noor Ahmed
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)        :   G.A.

Court No. - 71
                 HON'BLE RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA, J.

1. Heard, Learned counsel for the applicant, the Learned A.G.A. for the
State and perused the record.

2. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the
applicant in Case Crime No.129 of 2026, under Sections 8/21/29 NDPS
Act, Police Station- Nakud, District Saharanpur, with a prayer to enlarge
him on anticipatory bail as the applicant apprehends his arrest in the
above-mentioned case.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that an absolutely
bogus case has been brought up in the FIR where the allegation is of the
co-accused Usman supposedly taking the contraband in question from the
applicant for delivering the same to the brother of the applicant. Learned
counsel further submits that 100 grams of smack is said to have been
recovered from the possession of the accused, which is much below the
commercial quantity. The applicant although has a criminal history of 16
cases but he is not a previous convict. The co-accused Usman has been
granted regular bail by this court in bail Criminal Misc. Bail Application
No.11614 of 2026 and co-accused Salik, the brother of the applicant has
been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in NABAIL No.8141 of 2026.

4. Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail and has stated that the
applicant has a long criminal history. He may not be considered for grant
of anticipatory bail. The applicant is stated to be the supplier of the smack
                                                     NABAIL No. 9120 of 2026
                               2


in question and he may be required for custodial interrogation and further
recoveries.

5. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the
parties.

6. The explanation with respect to the criminal antecedents of the
applicant has been given in the supplementary affidavit. The applicant is
stated to be on bail in all the cases. Six cases relate to Sections 392, 411
IPC and also two cases are under the Gangsters Act. From the pattern of
cases lodged against the applicant where most of the cases appear to be
cases where the applicant has been implicated by the police, in the
opinion of the Court, the false implication of the applicant cannot be ruled
out. The contraband in question is much below the commercial quantity
of smack prescribed, which is 250 grams. Co-accused Usman has been
granted regular bail and co-accused Salik has been granted anticipatory
bail by this Court.

7. The version of the prosecution that has been set up of one brother
supposedly transporting the smack to another brother by employing the
service of the co-accused Usman, prima facie appears to be suspicious
and unnatural.

8. Taking into account all the facts and circumstances of the case and
without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I deem it fit to
enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail.

9. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant
is allowed.

10. In the event of the arrest of the applicant Sabir, he shall be released
forthwith in the aforesaid case crime on anticipatory bail on furnishing a
personal bond and surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the
Station House Officer of the police station/Court concerned with the
following conditions:-

i. the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police
officer as and when required;
                                                                                          NABAIL No. 9120 of 2026
                                                                   3


                                    ii. that 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. that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission
                                    of the Court;

                                    iv. that the applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution
                                    witness;

                                    11. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the Court concerned
                                    shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.

                                    12. It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively
                                    for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and are not to be
                                    considered to be an opinion on the merits of the case.



                                                                                      (Rajiv Lochan Shukla,J.)
                                    September 21, 2026
                                    S.A.




Digitally signed by :-
SALMAN AHMAD
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad