Mohd. Faishal Ansari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:42350

Court No. - 14

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1252 of 2025

Applicant :- Mohd. Faishal Ansari Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Desh Deepak Verma,Anil Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the record.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that 272 gms of morphine is said to have been recovered from the diggi of the scooty which belongs to the applicant. The co-accused Abdul Ajij Ansari, who is also said to be riding on the said vehicle, has been enlarged on bail by a coordinate bench of this Court vide order dated 5.3.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 1076 of 2025.

¶8

It is further submitted that the recovered contraband is slightly above the commercial quantity. The search and seizure of the alleged contraband is extremely doubtful as the recovery is said to have been effected in presence of the Circle Officer. However, his name has not been disclosed nor he has been made a witness in the charge-sheet. Furthermore, the applicant has no criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 17.1.2025. There is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released on bail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the recovered contraband substance is above the commercial quantity. However, he could not give any explanation as to why the Circle Officer was not made a witness in the charge sheet.

¶10

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, prima facie the twin conditions as contained in Section 37(1)(b) of the N.D.P.S. Act, appear to have been satisfied and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, the bail order of the co-accused Abdul Ajij Ansari so also the fact that there appears to be no compliance of Section 50 of the N.D.P.S Act as the Circle Officer has not been made a witness in the charge-sheet, which creates doubt about the recovery made from the applicant;

¶11

applicant is in jail since 17.1.2025 having no criminal antecedents and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶12

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶13

Let the applicant- Mohd. Faishal Ansari involved in Case Crime No.27 of 2025, under sections 8/21(C)/29/60 of N.D.P.S. Act, Police Station- Jaidpur, District- Barabanki, 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 which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶14

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶15

(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶16

(iii) 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.

¶17

(iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶18

(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶19

(vi) In case the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 84 B.N.S.S. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of B.N.S.

¶20

Order Date :- 23.7.2025 Shravan

¶21

Digitally signed by :- SHRAVAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Mohd. Faishal Ansari v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Faishal Ansari v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Prem Chandra Pandey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and Another

Smt. Bhagmati Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Saheem Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Raksha Sonkar vs M/S Paarth Infrabuild Pvt. Thru. Authorised Signatory

Gyan Prakash Upadhyay vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko

Gyan Prakash Upadhyay vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. Lko.