Nadeem @ Raghu Vs State of U.P. — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2025)

Nadeem @ Raghu Vs State of U.P. — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Regular bail granted to applicant Nadeem @ Raghu upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, subject to conditions (no tampering with evidence; no pressurising/intimidating prosecution witnesses; appearance before the trial court on dates fixed); sureties to be verified before issuance of the release order; breach of conditions to be a ground for cancellation of bail.

Issue for consideration

Whether regular bail should be granted to the applicant, Nadeem @ Raghu, an accused in Case Crime No. 95 of 2025 registered under Sections 8/21/29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 at Police Station Kutubsher, District Saharanpur, during the pendency of trial. +3 more

Court's answer

Upon consideration of the complicity of the accused, severity of punishment and the totality of facts and circumstances, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the presiding judge found the present stage a fit case for bail.

Ratio / Principle

The applicant is to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned; before the release order is issued, the sureties are to be verified.

Key takeaways

The grant of bail is made subject to the conditions that the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during trial, shall not pressurise or intimidate prosecution witnesses, and shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed.ratio¶17
Breach of any of the above bail conditions shall constitute a ground for cancellation of bail.ratio¶19
Observations made while granting bail shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Krishan Pahal, J.) — Bail granted. Applicant Nadeem @ Raghu sought regular bail in Case Crime No. 95 of 2025 under Sections 8/21/29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Police Station Kutubsher, District Saharanpur, during the pendency of trial. Counsel urged innocence and false implication, that the applicant is not named in the FIR, that the recovered contraband is below commercial quantity, and non-compliance of the mandatory Section 50, N.D.P.S. Act; criminal history of eight cases was stated to be explained and the applicant was in custody since 02.05.2025; a supplementary affidavit was taken on record. The court invoked the Supreme Court's rulings in Arif Khan @ Agha Khan v. State of Uttarakhand (2018) 18 SCC 380 (Section 50 mandatorily requires search of the suspect/accused in the presence of a Magistrate or Gazetted officer even if the right is waived) and Prabhakar Tewari v. State of U.P. (2020 (11) SCC 648) (pendency of several criminal cases per se no basis for refusing bail if bail otherwise made out), and, weighing complicity of the accused, severity of punishment and totality of facts and circumstances without expressing any opinion on merits, found a fit case for bail: release on a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, surety verification before the release order, conditions barring tampering with evidence and intimidation of prosecution witnesses and requiring appearance before the trial court on fixed dates, breach to attract cancellation; bail-stage observations not to affect the trial Judge's independent opinion. Order dated 24.7.2025.