Nasim vs State of U.P. — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2025)

Nasim vs State of U.P. — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Release of applicant Nasim on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to three conduct conditions (no tampering with evidence/witnesses; sincere trial cooperation without adjournments; no criminal activity post-release), breach being a ground for cancellation, with prior verification of identity, status and residence proof of applicant and sureties.

Issue for consideration

Whether applicant Nasim, held in Case Crime No. 07 of 2025 under Section 8/20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (Police Station Katghar, District Moradabad) for alleged recovery of 1 Kg. 130 gram of Charas and Rs.460, ought to be released on bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. +1 more

Court's answer

Considering the facts of the case, the settled principle that bail is the rule and committal to jail the exception (per the Apex Court precedents relied upon), the larger mandate of Article 21 of the Constitution, the nature of accusations and evidence, severity of punishment, character and peculiar circumstances of the applicant, possibility of securing his presence at trial and apprehension of witness tampering, and without expressing any opinion on the merits, the presiding judge found it a fit case for grant of bail.

Ratio / Principle

Applicant Nasim was ordered released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, subject to conditions: (i) no tampering with prosecution evidence or intimidating/pressurizing witnesses during investigation or trial; (ii) sincere cooperation in the trial without seeking adjournments; and (iii) no indulgence in any criminal activity after release; breach of any condition to be a ground for cancellation of bail, and identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties to be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

NDPS bail granted — High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (Court No. 68), Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 3006 of 2025, order dated 16.4.2025 by Hon'ble Ashutosh Srivastava, J. (Neutral Citation 2025:AHC:57303): bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 moved by Nasim, implicated in Case Crime No. 07 of 2025 under Section 8/20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Police Station Katghar, District Moradabad, wherein 1 Kg. 130 gram of Charas and Rs.460 are alleged to have been recovered from his possession; applicant in jail since 4.1.2025 with no criminal history. Counsel contended false implication, absence of independent witness to the recovery, failure to strictly follow Section 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act and absence of any chemical analyst's report; Shri Ramendra Pal Singh, learned A.G.A., opposed, warning of recurrence. Invoking State of Rajasthan Vs. Balchand @ Baliay (1977) 4 SCC 308 (bail, not jail) and Gudikanti Narasimhulu And Ors vs Public Prosecutor, High Court Of Andhra Pradesh, AIR 1978 SC 429, and the larger mandate of Article 21 of the Constitution, the Court, expressly without expressing any opinion on the merits, held it a fit case for grant of bail: release ordered on a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount, conditional on non-tampering with prosecution evidence/witnesses, sincere cooperation in trial without adjournments and abstention from crime, breach being ground for cancellation, and identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties to be verified before acceptance of bonds.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:57303

Court No. - 68

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3006 of 2025

Applicant :- Nasim Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Kumar Pandey,Shailendra Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Ashutosh Srivastava,J.

Supplementary Affidavit filed today is taken on record.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Ramendra Pal Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record of the case.

The present bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed on behalf of applicant, Nasim with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 07 of 2025, under Section 8/20 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Police Station Katghar , District Moradabad.

Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that 1 Kg. 130 gram of Charas and Rs.460 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, who is in jail since 4.1.2025 having no criminal history to his credit, deserves to be released on bail. In case the applicant is released on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

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 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.

It is settled position of law that bail is the rule and committal to jail is an exception in the case of State of Rajasthan Vs. Balchand @ Baliay (1977) 4 SCC 308 , the Apex Court observed that refusal of bail is a restriction on the personal liberty of the individual guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution and opined para 2 "The basic rule may perhaps be tersely put as bail, not jail, except where there are circumstances suggestive of fleeing from justice or thwarting the course of justice or creating other troubles in the shape of repeating offences or intimidating witnesses and the like, by the petitioner who seeks enlargement on bail from the court. We do. not intend to be exhaustive but only illustrative." and considering the facts of the case and keeping in mind, the ratio of the Apex Court's judgment in the case of Gudikanti Narasimhulu And Ors vs Public Prosecutor, High Court Of Andhra Pradesh, AIR 1978 SC 429 , larger mandate of Article 21 of the constitution of India, the nature of accusations, the nature of evidence in support thereof, the severity of punishment which conviction will entail, the character of the accused-applicant, circumstances which are peculiar to the accused, reasonable possibility of securing the presence of the accused at the trial, reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered with, the larger interest of the public/ State and other circumstances, but without expressing any opinion on the merits, I am of the view that it is a fit case for grant of bail.

Without expressing any opinion on the merits, let the applicant Nasim involved in above said 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 :-

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

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

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

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.

Order Date :- 16.4.2025 SFH

Digitally signed by :- SYED FAHIM HUSAIN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad