Allowed¶15

Dhaniram @ Chhote Verma v. State of U.P.

Bail – NDPS Act

Allahabad HC18 Nov 2025BAIL/35568/2025

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court bail order dated 18.11.2025 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 35568 of 2025, Dhaniram @ Chhote Verma v. State of U.P. (Nalin Kumar Srivastava, J.). Bail allowed under Sections 8/20, 20(A) NDPS Act, Case Crime No. 107 of 2025, P.S. Pailani, District Banda; recovery of about 42 kg 800 gm dry ganja from applicant's house/field on 11.5.2025; reliance on Dataram Singh v. State of U.P., (2018) 3 SCC 22; release on personal bond with two heavy sureties and standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted to applicant Dhaniram @ Chhote Verma in Case Crime No. 107 of 2025, Sections 8/20, 20(A) NDPS Act, P.S. Pailani, District Banda, on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount, subject to conditions in paras 17-21; sureties to be verified before release order. ¶15

Dhaniram @ Chhote Verma vs State of U.P. — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶15

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant, arraigned in Case Crime No. 107 of 2025 under Sections 8/20, 20(A) NDPS Act following recovery of about 42 kg 800 gm of ganja, is entitled to bail.

¶10

Court's answer

Grounds for bail are sufficient; considering the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment and submissions of counsel, and relying on the dictum in Dataram Singh, and without expressing any opinion on the merits, the applicant has made out a case for bail and the bail application is allowed.

¶15

Ratio / Principle

The applicant Dhaniram @ Chhote Verma is to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to conditions (no tampering with evidence, no pressurising/intimidating prosecution witnesses, appearance before the trial court, no similar offence, no inducement/threat/promise to dissuade disclosure); sureties to be verified before issuance of the release order; on breach of any condition the prosecution may move for cancellation of bail.

¶16

Key takeaways

The submissions and observations in this order are confined to deciding the bail application; the trial court shall not be influenced by them while deciding the trial.obiter¶23

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail — NDPS Act — recovery of ganja tree with dry ganja weighing about 42 kg 800 gm from the house/field of the applicant on 11.5.2025; Case Crime No. 107 of 2025 under Sections 8/20, 20(A) NDPS Act, P.S. Pailani, District Banda; applicant in custody since 11.5.2025 — Held, grounds for bail sufficient; without expressing any opinion on merits, and relying on the dictum of the Apex Court in Dataram Singh vs. State of U.P. and another, (2018) 3 SCC 22, applicant made out a case for bail; released on personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount subject to conditions regarding tampering, witness intimidation, trial attendance, similar offences and inducement; breach entitles prosecution to seek cancellation; observations confined to the bail application.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35568 of 2025

¶3

Dhaniram @ Chhote Verma

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

Versus
State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Amit Kumar Dixit Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

¶6

Court No. - 71

¶7

HON'BLE NALIN KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record. Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶9

The police retrieved ganja tree along with dry ganja weighing about 42 kg and 800 gm from the house/ field of the present accused applicant at 13.40 hours on 11.5.2025 when the police force was on gust. The accused applicant confessed his guilt before the police that he works to grow the ganja and when it is dry it is sold by him for earning some money. The police took into possession of the narcotics substance and other incriminating articles and when no licence was produced by the accused applicant to the police he was taken into custody and FIR was lodged.

¶10

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has not committed any offence. Alleged offences are not made out against the applicant. The allegations made in the FIR are false. It is further submitted that the police has came forward with a false story and as a matter of fact nothing was recovered from the house of the accused. The recovery is said to have taken place in the day light in a abadi place but however, no independent witness was obtained by the police. It is further submitted that the criminal history of seven cases has been explained in the affidavit. It is further submitted that in the NDPS Act this is for the first time when the applicant has been named as accused. Applicant is languishing in jail since 11.5.2025 and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.

¶11

On the other hand, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail.

¶12

Grounds for bail are sufficient. Hence, keeping in view the nature of the

¶13

BAIL No. 35568 of 2025

¶14

¶15

offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh vs. State of U.P. and another, (2018) 3 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶16

Let the applicant Dhaniram @ Chhote Verma involved in Case Crime No. 107 of 2025, under Sections 8/20, 20(A) NDPS Act, P.S.- Pailani, DistrictBanda be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy 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.

¶17

i. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶18

ii. The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶19

iii. The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶20

iv. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶21

v. The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶22

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶23

Submissions and observations made in this order are only for deciding the bail application. The trial Court while deciding the trial will not be influenced with the same.

¶24

November 18, 2025 Fhd

¶25

(Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.)

¶26

Digitally signed by :- FAHAD NIYAZ High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Dhaniram @ Chhote Verma v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dhaniram @ Chhote Verma 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ajay Singh vs State of U.P.

Om Prakash Patel vs State of U.P.

Shivam Gurjar vs State of U.P. and Another

Avanish Kumar vs State of U.P. and Another

Pintu Yadav Alias Kaushal Yadav and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Uruj Alam @ Ashu vs State of U.P.