Allowed¶10

Hamid Khan v. the State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Bail granted – NDPS Act

Allahabad HC6 Jun 2025BAIL/5158/2025

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Hamid Khan bail NDPS Act 8/21 Section 37 not attracted below commercial quantity 14-15 grams Section 50 compliance Gonda Katra Bazar Tabrez Riyaz confessional statement supplementary affidavit criminal history custody since 09.05.2025 Allahabad High Court Lucknow Bench Karunesh Singh Pawar 2025:AHC-LKO:34874 CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION 5158 of 2025

What did the court decide?

Applicant Hamid Khan to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to five enumerated conditions (non-tampering, non-intimidation of witnesses, undertaking against adjournments, presence before trial court, and consequences of misuse under Sections 229-A/174-A IPC and 82 Cr.P.C.). ¶10

Hamid Khan Vs the State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy… — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶10

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant is eligible for enlargement on bail notwithstanding the stringent bail conditions of Section 37 NDPS Act, given that the recovered quantity of contraband is below the commercial quantity prescribed in the Schedule to the NDPS Act. +1 more

¶6

Court's answer

The stringent conditions as contained in Section 37 of the NDPS Act are not attracted in the present case, as the recovered quantity is below the commercial quantity.

¶9

Ratio / Principle

Taking into account that Section 37 conditions do not apply, the applicant's custody since 09.05.2025, the below-commercial recovery quantity and the explained criminal history, the court found it a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case.

¶9

Key takeaways

The bail application is accordingly allowed.ratio¶10
The applicant is to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to conditions imposed in the interest of justice.ratio¶11
Release is conditioned on non-tampering with evidence, non-intimidation of witnesses, an undertaking not to seek adjournments on evidence dates (default treatable as abuse of bail liberty), presence before the trial court (absence without sufficient cause exposing the applicant to proceedings under Section 229-A IPC), and, upon misuse of bail liberty followed by issuance of proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. and failure to appear, initiation of proceedings under Section 174-A IPC.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail granted - NDPS Act - Sections 8/21 offence (Case Crime No. 40 of 2025, P.S. Katra Bazar, Distt. Gonda) - recovery of 14-15 grams of contraband from co-accused Tabrez and Riyaz on 02.03.2025, i.e., below the commercial quantity prescribed in the Schedule to the NDPS Act - consequently the stringent conditions of Section 37 NDPS Act held not attracted - applicant (Hamid Khan) not arrested from spot, allegedly implicated on confessional statements of co-accused; non-compliance with Section 50 NDPS Act urged by defence - applicant in jail since 09.05.2025; criminal history explained in supplementary affidavit - single Judge (Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar, J.) allows bail without expressing opinion on merits, on personal bond and two sureties each in like amount, with conditions including undertaking not to seek adjournments, attendance before trial court, and exposure to Sections 229-A/174-A IPC and Section 82 Cr.P.C. on default/misuse - Order dated 6.6.2025; Neutral Citation 2025:AHC-LKO:34874.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:34874

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5158 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Hamid Khan Opposite Party :- The State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Imran Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

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

¶7

The present bail application has been filed by the accused-applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No. 40 of 2025, under Section 8/21 of the NDPS Act, 1985, Police Station Katra Bazar, District Gonda.

¶8

In the prosecution case, it is alleged that on 02.03.2025, while the complainant was on routine checking upon receiving certain information regarding the accused persons, the police apprehended co-accused Tabrez and Riyaz, and upon their personal search, a recovery of 14–15 grams of contraband was made.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was not arrested from the spot and has been falsely implicated in the present case on the basis of the confessional statements of the co-accused. It is further submitted that there has been no compliance with the mandatory provisions of Section 50 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

¶10

Learned counsel next contends that the quantity of contraband allegedly recovered is below the commercial quantity as prescribed in the Schedule to the NDPS Act. He has explained the applicant’s criminal history in the supplementary affidavit.

¶11

It is also submitted that since the recovered contraband is below the minimum commercial quantity, the stringent conditions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act are not attracted in the present case.

¶12

It is further submitted that the applicant is in jail since 09.05.2025 and there is no possibility of the applicant 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.

¶13

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶14

On due consideration of the arguments advanced, perusal of the record, and the fact that the stringent conditions as contained in Section 37 of the NDPS Act are not attracted in the present case, coupled with the fact that the applicant is in jail since 09.05.2025, the recovered quantity is below the commercial quantity, and the applicant has explained his criminal history in the supplementary affidavit, 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.

¶15

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶16

Let the applicant, Hamid Khan, involved in the aforesaid case crime number, 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 imposed in the interest of justice:

¶17

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

¶18

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

¶19

(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 any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶20

(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 the liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶21

(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 under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶22

(vi) In case the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial, and to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. 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 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶23

Order Date :- 6.6.2025

¶24

Madhu D.R/P.S

¶25

Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Hamid Khan v. the State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hamid Khan v. the State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home 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

Suresh Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Akhilesh Rai Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Rahul Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Lko. and 3 Others

Rohit Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.

Bhondu @ Imtiyaj Ali Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

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