Gudiya vs State of U.P.

The present bail application has been filed on behalf of applicant with a prayer to release her on bail in Case Crime No. 249 of 2025, under Sections 8/21/27 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Police Station Parasrampur, District Basti.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that about 1 Kg 10 Gram Morphine is alleged to have been recovered from the possession of the applicant. In fact no such recovery was effected from the applicant. He submits that the applicant is a lady and she is not involved in the present case. He submits that in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed and the applicant is not required for any custodial interrogation. He submits that the applicant had gone to the market for treatment of her child. He submits that the alleged vehicle from the contraband has been recovered is not registered in the name of the applicant. The applicant is a lady and her role is distinguished from the co-accused. It is further submitted that since such recovery is not supported by independent witness, possibility of her 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, 52-A 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

¶11

BAIL No. 32696 of 2025

¶12

2

¶13

and victimize her. The applicant is in jail since 11.08.2025. He submits that the applicant is having no criminal history to her credit and there is no likelihood of her fleeing from course of justice or tampering with evidence in case of release on bail. In case the applicant is released on bail she will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶14

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

¶15

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶16

Without expressing any opinion on the merits, let the applicant, Gudiya, involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that :-

¶17

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

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

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.

¶21

December 16, 2025

¶22

pks

¶23

(Ashutosh Srivastava,J.)

¶24

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

Gudiya v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gudiya 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

Ankit Kumar Nishad vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Pramod Sharma vs State of U.P.

Amit Tomar @ Ankit vs State of U.P.

Md. Shahnawaz @ Shanu vs State of U.P.

Arvind Kumar vs State of U.P.

Mayank Sharma vs State of U.P.