Ramcharan Verma Vs State of U.P.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11268 of 2026

Ramcharan Verma

.....Applicant(s)

	Versus
State of U.P.		.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Sher Bahadur Yadav	Yadav, Yogendra Nath
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

¶5

Court No. - 64

¶6

HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J.

¶7

Learned AGA for the State submits that the instructions have been received and he has no objection in case the bail application is decided on merits.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri N.K.Sharma, learned AGA for the State-opposite party.

¶9

The instant bail application, under Section 483 BNSS, has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 23 of 2026, under Section 8/20/29 N.D.P.S. Act, Police Station- Kotwali Dehat, District Mirzapur during the pendency of trial.

¶10

Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. False recovery of 28.135 Kg. ganja (27 packets) has been shown from a Swift Car, which does not belong to the applicant. The applicant had no concern with the alleged contraband being ferried in the aforesaid car. The applicant was also one of the passenger. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. The alleged packets of ganja were weighed along with the packing material. No accurate scientific instruments were used for weighment. The mandatory provisions of Sections 42, 50 and 52A of N.D.P.S. Act have not been complied with. The procedure for sampling provided under Rule 8, 9,10 and 11 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (Seizure, Storage, Sampling and Disposal) Rules, 2022 have been violated. There is no FSL report to establish that the substance recovered is ganja. Criminal history of the

¶11

BAIL No. 11268 of 2026

¶12

2

¶13

applicant has been explained in para 19 of the affidavit. The applicant is in jail since 16.01.2026 and in case, he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶14

Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶15

Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record, I am of the prima facie view that the mandate of Chapter V of the NDPS Act has not been followed. There is no independent witness to the recovery. The procedure for sampling provided under Rule 8, 9, 10 and 11 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (Seizure, Storage, Sampling and Disposal) Rules, 2022 have been violated. Moreover, the applicant has remained confined for more than three months and after submission of charge sheet there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, more so when no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or delay the trial or intimidate the witness, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶16

Let the applicant Ramcharan Verma involved in the aforesaid case crime 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 subject to the conditions that he:

¶17