Allowed¶14

Peera v. State of U.P.

NDPS Act – bail – Sections 8/20

Allahabad HC13 Oct 2025BAIL/26609/2025

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Peera v. State of U.P.; Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 26609 of 2025; High Court of Judicature at Allahabad; Justice Ashutosh Srivastava; NDPS Act Sections 8/20 and 50; bail allowed; alleged recovery of 1 Kg Charas; Case Crime No. 132 of 2025; P.S. Dilari, District Moradabad; applicant in jail since 17.06.2025; personal bond with two sureties; conditions against tampering and criminal activity; decided October 14, 2025.

What did the court decide?

Applicant Peera released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the conditions in paras 16-18; identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties to be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. ¶14

Peera Vs State of U.P. — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶14

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant Peera, involved in Case Crime No. 132 of 2025 under Section 8/20 of the NDPS Act, is entitled to be released on bail.

¶8

Court's answer

Bail application allowed; applicant Peera 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.

¶15

Ratio / Principle

Release on bail made subject to conditions: no tampering with prosecution evidence or intimidating/pressurising witnesses during investigation or trial, sincere cooperation in the trial without seeking adjournments, and no indulgence in criminal activity after release; breach of any condition shall be a ground for cancellation of bail, and identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties is to be verified before the bonds are accepted.

¶19

Key takeaways

Bail was granted without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case; the merits remain open.obiter¶15

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

NDPS Act — bail — Sections 8/20 — applicant Peera sought bail in Case Crime No. 132 of 2025, P.S. Dilari, District Moradabad, concerning an alleged recovery of 1 Kg of Charas from his possession. Counsel for the applicant contended that no recovery was effected from the applicant, that the recovery was not supported by an independent witness, that Section 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act was not strictly followed, and that there was no chemical analyst report; the learned A.G.A. opposed the bail prayer. The Allahabad High Court (Ashutosh Srivastava, J.) allowed the bail application and, without expressing any opinion on the merits, directed release of the applicant, who was in jail since 17.06.2025, on a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount, subject to conditions (no tampering with prosecution evidence or intimidating witnesses, sincere cooperation in trial without adjournments, no criminal activity after release), breach being a ground for cancellation of bail. Decision dated October 14, 2025.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 26609 of 2025

¶3

Peera

¶4

	Versus	.....Applicant(s)
State of U.P.		.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)		: Madan Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)		: G.A.

¶5

Court No. - 68

¶6

HON'BLE ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA, J.

¶7

Heard Sri Madan Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Rajesh Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State-Respondent and perused the record of the case.

¶8

The present bail application has been filed on behalf of applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 132 of 2025, under Section 8/20 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Police Station Dilari, District Moradabad.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that 1 Kg of Charas is alleged to have been recovered from the possession of the applicant. In fact no such recovery was effected from the applicant. It is further submitted that since such recovery is not supported by independent witness, possibility of his false implication in the crime cannot be ruled out. It is next contended that in the present case the prosecution has failed to follow strictly the provisions of Section 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act. There is no report of chemical analyst. It is also argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present crime with a view to cause unnecessary harassment and victimize him. The applicant is in jail since 17.06.2025. He further submits that there is no likelihood of his fleeing from course of justice or tampering with evidence in case of release on bail. In case the applicant is released on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶10

Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre-

¶11

BAIL No. 26609 of 2025

¶12

¶13

trial stage who is involved in supplying contraband, therefore, the applicant does not deserve any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activity.

¶14

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶15

Without expressing any opinion on the merits, let the applicant, Peera, involved in the aforesaid case crime 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 that :-

¶16

The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶17

The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶18

The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶19

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶20

October 14, 2025

¶21

pks

¶22

(Ashutosh Srivastava,J.)

¶23

Digitally signed by :- PAWAN KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Peera v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Peera v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases