Lal Babu Yadav vs Narcotics Control Bureau

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33212 of 2025

¶3

Lal Babu Yadav

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

Versus
Narcotics Control Bureau .....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Biswajeet Mukherjee
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Ashish Pandey

¶6

Court No. - 69

¶7

HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.

¶8

Heard Sri Biswajeet Mukherjee, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Vipul Pandey, Advocate, holding brief of Sri Ashish Pandey, learned counsel for the N.C.B. and perused the record.

¶9

The present bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, has been filed on behalf of applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 27 of 2021 under Section 8/20/25/29/60 NDPS Act, registered at Police Station N.C.B., Lucknow, District Chandauli during pendency of the trial.

¶10

It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that this is third bail application filed on behalf of the applicant while the first bail application was dismissed for want of prosecution and the second one was dismissed on merits vide order dated 24.7.2024. It is further submitted that after rejection of the second bail application of the applicant, coaccused Ramakant Yadav has been granted bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 03.7.2025 passed in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 22798 of 2025. It is further submitted that as per the FIR, 604 kg of ganja is said to have been recovered from a truck and applicant is said to be the driver of the said truck whereas co-accused Ramakant Yadav is said to be the cleaner of the same and role of the applicant is not distinguishable from the role of co-accused Ramakant Yadav. It is further submitted that till date only one witness has been examined by the learned trial court and trial is not likely to conclude in near future and the

¶11

BAIL No. 33212 of 2025

¶12

2

¶13

applicant is languishing in jail since 29.6.2021 i.e. near about five years. It is also submitted that the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty, if granted. It has also been pointed out that in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial.

¶14

On the other hand, learned counsel for the NCB opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant and submits that second bail application of the applicant was rejected on merits and no new ground has been made out by him for grant of bail.

¶15

This is third bail application filed on behalf of the applicant while the first bail application was dismissed for want of prosecution and the second one was dismissed on merits vide order dated 24.7.2024. Coaccused Ramakant Yadav has been granted bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court after rejection of the second bail application of the applicant. As per the FIR, 604 kg of ganja is said to have been recovered from a truck and applicant is said to be the driver of the said truck whereas coaccused Ramakant Yadav is said to be the cleaner of the same and role of the applicant is not distinguishable from the role of co-accused Ramakant Yadav.

¶16

Upon consideration of facts and circumstances of the case, the fact that applicant is languishing in jail since 29.6.2021 and only one witness has been examined by the trial court so far and there is no likelihood of the trial being concluded in near future and the fact that co-accused Ramakant Yadav has been granted bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶17

Let the applicant Lal Babu Yadav involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions :-

¶18

(i) 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.

¶19

BAIL No. 33212 of 2025

¶20

3

¶21

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

¶22

(iii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of B.N.S.S.

¶23

(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 the trial court.

¶24

(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel.

¶25

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶26

It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order.

¶27

(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)

¶28

May 5, 2026

¶29

Madhurima

¶30

Digitally signed by :- MADHURIMA GARG High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Lal Babu Yadav v. Narcotics Control Bureau

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lal Babu Yadav v. Narcotics Control Bureau

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

Anees Ansari vs State of U.P.

Nadeem Kuraishi @ Babli vs State of U.P.

Balvinder @ Bindar vs State of U.P.

Arshad Ali vs State of U.P.

Bheema Ram vs State of U.P.

Rahul Singh vs State of U.P.