Allowed¶13

Rambabu Singh v. Union of India

Allahabad HC8 Jul 2025BAIL/6945/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

NDPS bail granted; Sections 8/22 N.D.P.S. Act; Section 37 N.D.P.S. Act invoked by opposite party; Central Bureau of Narcotics, Ghazipur; psychotropic substances in the form of medical drugs seized from shop 'Khushi General Store'; CCTV switched off during raid; no criminal antecedents; accused in jail about six months, trial not started; counter affidavit silent on independent witnesses' statements; release on personal bond with two sureties; Rambabu Singh; Avnish Saxena, J.; CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. 6945 of 2025; Neutral Citation 2025:AHC:107481; Apex Court cases cited by counsel: Lalrintuanga Sailo, MD. Nawaz Khan, Kashif.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted to the accused/applicant Rambabu Singh on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned. ¶13

Rambabu Singh vs Union of India — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Bail granted to the accused/applicant Rambabu Singh on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

¶13

Issue for consideration

Whether the accused/applicant, implicated under Sections 8/22 N.D.P.S. Act and in custody since December 2024, is entitled to release on bail. +1 more

¶13

Court's answer

Without touching the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed.

¶13

Ratio / Principle

The accused/applicant Rambabu Singh is to be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

¶14

Key takeaways

The question of mandatory compliance with the provisions of the NDPS Act is left open to be adjudicated at trial.obiter¶11
In allowing bail the Court took into account that the counter affidavit does not reveal the statements of the two independent witnesses, and that the accused has been in jail for about six months with the trial not yet started.ratio¶12

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Avnish Saxena, J.) allowed the bail application of Rambabu Singh, arrested on 14.12.2024 by the Central Bureau of Narcotics, Ghazipur, in Case No. Nil of 2024 under Sections 8/22 N.D.P.S. Act, Police Station C.B.N., District Ghazipur. The Court noted that the complaint was filed in June 2025; no plausible reply was offered regarding the switching off of the CCTV cameras of the applicant's shop ('Khushi General Store') during the raid; the applicant had no criminal history of previous conviction or criminal antecedents; the allegedly seized contraband were medical drugs; the counter affidavit did not reveal the statements of the two independent witnesses; and the accused had been in jail for about six months with the trial not started. Observing that mandatory compliance of the provisions of the NDPS Act was subject to adjudication in trial, and without touching the merits, the Court allowed bail on a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount. The opposite party (Union of India) had opposed bail invoking Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act and placed reliance on three decisions of the Apex Court.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:107481

¶2

Court No. - 87

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6945 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Rambabu Singh Opposite Party :- Union of India Counsel for Applicant :- Ramesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- Krishna Agarawal

¶5

Hon'ble Avnish Saxena,J.

¶6

Sri Ramesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel appears for the applicant and submit that the accused/applicant has been implicated in Case No.Nil of 2024, under Sections 8/22 N.D.P.S. Act, Police Station C.B.N., District Ghazipur.

¶7

Sri Singh further submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case by the Central Bureau of Narcotics, Ghazipur by way of vengeance as there is a dispute between him and his neighbour, who are in touch of the Narcotics Bureau and, therefore, the Narcotics Bureau has entered the shop of the applicant and confiscated three Psychotropic substances in the form of medical drug, which is shown open for sale. The entire arrest and recovery has been carried out after switching off the CCTV of the shop of the applicant, where the raid has been conducted. There is no mandatory compliance of the provisions of N.D.P.S. Act. All other items are also shown confiscated by the Narcotics Bureau. The accused-applicant is languishing in jail since December, 2024.

¶8

Sri Krishna Agarwal, Advocate appears for Central Bureau of Narcotics and submits that the entire arrest and recovery of contraband has been made on 14.12.2024. The complaint has been filed in the month of June, 2025, which is well within time. The entire process of arrest and recovery has been made in the presence of two independent witnesses. The point of vengeance argued before the Court is not mentioned in the bail application. The bail cannot be granted in view of Section 37 of N.D.P.S. Act. He has relied upon the following judgements of the Apex Court in the cases of The State of Meghalaya Vs. Lalrintuanga Sailo & Anr. reported in 2024 6 Supreme 568, Union of India through Narcotics Control Bureau, Lucknow Vs. MD. Nawaz Khan reported in (2021) 10 SCC 100 and Narcotics Control Bureau Vs. Kashif reported in 2024 0

¶9

Supreme (SC) 1264.

¶10

This Court has taken into consideration the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and perused the records.

¶11

The perusal of the record prima facie reveals that the team of Narcotics Bureau has made inspection of the shop premises of accused on 14.12.2024. The complaint has been submitted before the Court, according to Sri Agarwal, in the month of June, 2025. No plausible reply provided in switching off CCTV cameras of the shop. Accused is running 'Khushi General Store'. Accused does not have any criminal history of previous conviction or criminal antecedents. The allegedly seized contraband are medical drugs. The mandatory compliance of the provisions of NDPS Act is subject to adjudication in trial.

¶12

The counter affidavit does not reveal the statements of two independent witnesses. The accused is in jail since last six months, the trial has not been started.

¶13

Hence, without touching the merit of the case, the bail application is allowed.

¶14

The accused/applicant- Rambabu Singh be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned.

¶15

Order Date :- 8.7.2025

¶16

Mini

¶17

(Avnish Saxena,J.)

¶18

Digitally signed by :- MINI KANAUJIYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rambabu Singh v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rambabu Singh v. Union of India

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Alamgeer vs U.O.I. Thru. Intelligence Officer, Narcotics Control Bureau, Lucknow

Virendra Kumar @ Bindra vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Sharukh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

Charan Singh vs State of U.P.

Noor Mohammad vs State of U.P.

Farman vs State of U.P.