Allowed¶13

Jagdish Mahawat v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Allahabad HC28 Jul 2025BAIL/3755/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

NDPS bail application allowed; Section 50 N.D.P.S. Act non-compliance; 15 gm smack recovery below commercial quantity; no public witness; Sections 8/21 N.D.P.S. Act; Case Crime No. 34 of 2025, P.S. Fursatganj, District Amethi; applicant in jail since 10.3.2025; charge-sheet filed; personal bond with two sureties; conditions incl. Section 84 B.N.S.S. proclamation and Section 209 B.N.S.; Justice Karunesh Singh Pawar; decided 28.7.2025; 2025:AHC-LKO:43629.

What did the court decide?

Applicant Jagdish Mahawat to be released on bail in Case Crime No. 34 of 2025, Sections 8/21 N.D.P.S. Act, P.S. Fursatganj, District Amethi, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, subject to conditions (i)-(vi) imposed in the interest of justice. ¶13

Jagdish Mahawat Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home… — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶13

Issue for consideration

Whether applicant Jagdish Mahawat, accused in Case Crime No. 34 of 2025 under Sections 8/21 of the N.D.P.S. Act (alleged recovery of 15 gm smack from personal search), should be enlarged on bail.

¶11

Ratio / Principle

Grounds for granting bail: apparent non-compliance of Section 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act; absence of any public witness to the alleged recovery; recovered contraband below commercial quantity; criminal history duly explained in the supplementary affidavit; applicant in jail since 10.3.2025; charge-sheet filed.

¶11

Key takeaways

Without expressing any opinion on the merits, the court found it a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail and allowed the bail application.ratio¶12
Release directed on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to conditions (i)-(vi), including that on misuse of liberty of bail, proceedings may follow proclamation under Section 84 B.N.S.S. and Section 209 of B.N.S.ratio¶14

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench), Court No. 14, single Judge (Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar, J.), Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 3755 of 2025, decided 28.7.2025 (Neutral Citation No. 2025:AHC-LKO:43629). Applicant Jagdish Mahawat sought bail in Case Crime No. 34 of 2025 under Sections 8/21 N.D.P.S. Act, P.S. Fursatganj, District Amethi, involving alleged recovery of 15 gm of smack from his personal search. Granting bail, the court took into account: apparent non-compliance of Section 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act; absence of a public witness to the alleged recovery; contraband being below commercial quantity; criminal history explained in the supplementary affidavit; incarceration since 10.3.2025; and filing of the charge-sheet, while expressly refraining from expressing any opinion on merits. Release ordered on personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount with six conditions, including consequences of misuse of bail liberty via proclamation under Section 84 B.N.S.S. and proceedings under Section 209 of B.N.S.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:43629

¶2

Court No. - 14

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3755 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Jagdish Mahawat Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Mayur Gautam,Ashuja Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the record.

¶7

In the prosecution case, it is alleged that from the personal search of the applicant, 15 gm of smack has been recovered.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the alleged recovery is false and planted. There is no public witness to the said recovery. There appears to be no compliance of Section 50 of N.D.P.S. Act. The recovered contraband substance is below the commercial quantity.

¶9

It is further submitted that the applicant has explained the criminal history in para no. 3 of the supplementary affidavit. He is languishing in jail since 10.3.2025. Charge-sheet in the case has been filed. There is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released on bail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant.

¶11

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties so also the fact that there appears to be no compliance of Section 50 of the N.D.P.S Act; there is no public witness to the alleged recovery; the recovered contraband substance is below the commercial quantity; the applicant has duly explained the criminal history in the supplementary affidavit; he is languishing in jail since 10.3.2025; charge-sheet in the case has been filed and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶12

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶13

Let the applicant- Jagdish Mahawat involved in Case Crime No. 34 of 2025, under Sections 8/21 of N.D.P.S. Act, P.S. Fursatganj, District Amethi, be released on bail on his

¶14

furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

(iii) 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.

¶18

(iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶19

(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶20

(vi) In case the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 84 B.N.S.S. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of B.N.S.

¶21

Order Date :- 28.7.2025 Shravan

¶22

Digitally signed by :- SHRAVAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Jagdish Mahawat v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jagdish Mahawat v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

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

Junaid Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. Lko.

Ajay Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 2 Others

Himanshu Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Harikesh Pandey @ Harikesh Kumar Pandey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko

Raj Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

U.O.I. Thru Superintendent Customs Commissionerate (Prev.) U.P. /Uttrakhand (Minor B/C) Vs Mohd. Azimuddin S/O Moinuddin