Sohail Alias Suhan vs State of U.P.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7484 of 2026

Sohail Alias Suhan

	Versus .....	Applicant(s)
State of U.P.		.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Neeraj Srivastava, Pankaj	Srivastava
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

¶5

Court No. - 66

¶6

HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J.

¶7

Heard Sri Pankaj Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Manoj Kumar Singh, learned Brief holder for the State.

¶8

The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.571 of 2025, under Section 20/60 of NDPS Act, Police Station Chakeri, District Kanpur Nagar, during pendency of the trial.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits, as per allegations, while applicant along with his wife was sitting in a vehicle then from the vehicle more than 74 kg. ganja was recovered and, thereafter, applicant and his wife have also been made accused along with owner of the vehicle but entire allegations levelled against the applicant are totally false.

¶10

He next submits, applicant was not having any concern with the alleged recovery of contraband.

¶11

He further submits, applicant after taking lift just sat in the vehicle along with his wife and on the way during search, he was also apprehended along with his wife.

¶12

He further submits, even bail application of owner of the vehicle Devi Prasad has been allowed by the coordinate Bench of this Court, vide order

¶13

BAIL No. 7484 of 2026

¶14

2

¶15

dated 10.03.2026 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 6718 of 2026 and the case of applicant is on better footing then him.

¶16

He next submits, even coordinate Bench of this Court has released the wife of the applicant i.e. co-accused Smt. Malika Sultana Ahmad on bail on 11.12.2025 and her bail order has been annexed at page 45 of the paper book.

¶17

He next submits, even co-accused Guddi, who was also apprehended along with applicant and his wife, has also been released on bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court and her bail order has been annexed at page 47 of the paper book.

¶18

He next submits, even applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter, he is in jail since 31.08.2025 i.e. for the last almost eight months.

¶19

He further argues, therefore, considering the above facts, the applicant should be enlarged on bail.

¶20

Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submits that from the possession of the applicant and other co-accused, huge commercial quantity of Ganja was recovered and though applicant was not the owner of the vehicle but he was sitting in the vehiclealong with his wife but he could not dispute the fact that even owner of the vehicle and other two accused, who were also sitting along with applicant in the vehicle including his wife, have been released on bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court.

¶21

He also could not dispute the fact that applicant is not having any other criminal history and in the present matter, applicant is in jail since for last almost eight months.

¶22

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

¶23

However, as per allegation, from the possession of the applicant and four others, huge commercial quantity of Ganja was recovered but admittedly applicant was not owner of the vehicle and owner of the

¶24

BAIL No. 7484 of 2026

¶25

3

¶26

vehicle Devi Prasad, who was also apprehended along with applicant and was also sitting in the vehicle has already been released on bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court.

¶27

Further, even wife of the applicant and co-accused Guddi, who were also apprehended along with applicant and were sitting in the vehicle have been released on bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court and as far as allegations are concerned, the case of the applicant is at par with his wife and co-accused Guddi and appears to be on better footing than coaccused Devi Prasad, who was owner of the vehicle.

¶28

Further, even applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter applicant is in jail for the last more than eight months.

¶29

The Apex Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. CBI & another (2022) 10 SCC 51 in paragraph no. 98 has observed that:-

¶30

"Uniformity and certainty in the decisions of the court are the foundations of judicial dispensation. Persons accused with same offence shall never be treated differently either by the same court or by the same or different courts. Such an action though by an exercise of discretion despite being a judicial one would be a grave affront to Articles 14 and 15 of the Constitution of India."

¶31

Therefore, considering the above observations made by the Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil (supra) and considering the Article 14 and 15 of the Constitution of India, in my view, applicant should also be released on bail.

¶32

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed .

¶33

20 Let the applicant - Sohail @ Suhan 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 with the following conditions:-

¶34

(i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted.

¶35

BAIL No. 7484 of 2026

¶36

4

¶37

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make 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.

¶38

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.

¶39

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.

¶40

It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.

¶41

(Sameer Jain,J.)

¶42

April 20, 2026 Mini

¶43

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

Sohail Alias Suhan v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sohail Alias Suhan v. State of U.P.

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

Jaiprakash vs State of U.P.

Ugrasen Chauhan @ Lal vs State of U.P.

Sonu @ Navneet vs State of U.P.

Smt Sandhya vs State of U.P.

Pramod vs State of U.P.

Rajesh vs State of U.P. and 3 Others