Prakhar Soni vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

2. It is alleged in the prosecution case that on the secret information that vehicle No.UP32EG 2203 carrying illegal ganja (cannabis) was apprehended. Four accused persons have been found sitting in the vehicle. From the applicant, it is alleged that five packets, weighing 6.30kg ganja are alleged to have been recovered. From all the four accused persons, 20.900kg ganja is said to have been recovered.

¶13

3.Learned counsel next contended that alleged recovery of contraband is 'below commercial quantity'. The applicant has no criminal history. The applicant is in jail since 27.1.2026.

¶14

It is further submitted that 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.

¶15

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

¶16

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the applicant has no criminal history, recovered quantity from the applicant is below commercial, and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments

¶17

BAIL No. 1002 of 2026

¶18

2

¶19

advanced by learned counsel for the parties, for the period for which he is in jail 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. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶20

6. Let the applicant Prakhar Soni, involved in Case Crime No.32 of 2026 under Sections 8/20(B)/60 of N.D.P.S. Act, P.S. Kotwali Nagar, district Raebareli, 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 which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶21

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

¶22

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

¶23

(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.

¶24

(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.

¶25

(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 I.P.C (now 269 BNS).

¶26

(vi) In case the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C.(now 84 BNSS) 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 I.P.C. (Now 209 BNS).

¶27

BAIL No. 1002 of 2026

¶28

3

¶29

7.Submission of applicant's counsel, at this stage, is that the applicant is a student of High School and his Hindi examination is scheduled to take place on 18.2.2026. He may be permitted to appear in the examination in police custody during verification of his bail documents.

¶30

8.In view of the above, the Superintendent Jail, Raebareli is directed to allow the applicant in police custody to give examination on 18th February, 2026.

¶31

(Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.)

¶32

February 16, 2026

¶33

kkb/

¶34

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

Prakhar Soni v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prakhar Soni v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. 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

Similar cases

Abhishek Mishra @ Kuldeep Mishra vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko

Sanjay Kumar Mishra vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. State Tax Govt. of U.P., Lko. and 5 Others

Ram Piyare vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Revenue Lko. and 2 Others

Tarun Dubey vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Dr. Manish Sharma and 22 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Medical Health and Family Welfare Lko. and 2 Others

Akash Verma vs State of U.P. Thru. Add. Chief. Secy. Home Civil Secretariat Lko.