Anil Kumar Vs Narcotics Control Bureo Thru Its Inteligence Officer Lucknow

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 29749 of 2025

Anil Kumar

	Versus	.....	Applicant(s)
Narcotics Control Bureo Thru Its Officer Lucknow	Inteligence		.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Counsel for Opposite Party(s) :	Manish Kumar Kashyap Ashish Pandey	Kashyap,	V.P. Singh

¶5

Court No. - 67

¶6

HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.

¶7

List has been revised.

¶8

Counter affidavit filed on behalf of NCB is taken on record. Learned counsel for the applicant does not propose to file rejoinder affidavit to it.

¶9

Heard Sri V.P. Singh Kashyap, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Vipul Pandey, Advocate holding brief of Sri Ashish Pandey, learned counsel appearing for NCB and perused the material placed on record.

¶10

Applicant seeks bail in NCB Crime No. 15 of 2025, under Sections 8/18/27A, 29/60 of The Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Police Station- NCB Lucknow, District- Budaun, during the pendency of trial.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with a view to cause unnecessary harassment and to victimize him. The allegations are per se false and there is no recovery from the applicant. The recovery of 1.6 Kg. of Opium is stated to have been made from the coaccused person. The said contraband is below the commercial quantity.

¶12

It is further argued by learned counsel for the applicant that there is no compliance of mandatory provision of Section 52A of the N.D.P.S. Act. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in

¶13

BAIL No. 29749 of 2025

¶14

2

¶15

jail since 11.7.2025. The applicant is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶16

Per contra, learned counsel appearing for NCB has vehemently opposed the bail application but could not dispute that the recovered contraband is below the commercial quantity and the rigors of Section 37 of NDPS Act do not apply to the instant case.

¶17

Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment as well as totality of facts and circumstances, without commenting on the merits of the case, prima facie, I find it a fit case for bail.

¶18

Let the applicant- Anil Kumar , who is involved in aforementioned case 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶19

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

¶20

(ii) The applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses.

¶21

(iii) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed.

¶22

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶23

It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶24

(Krishan Pahal,J.)

¶25

October 6, 2025 Vikas Verma

¶26

Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Anil Kumar v. Narcotics Control Bureo Thru Its Inteligence Officer Lucknow

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anil Kumar v. Narcotics Control Bureo Thru Its Inteligence Officer Lucknow

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