Allowed¶7

Santoshi Devi and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC16 Jan 2026NABAIL/242/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court; anticipatory bail; S. 482 BNSS; NDPS Ss. 8/21/29; Case Crime No. 516 of 2025; P.S. Kotwali Dehat, District Mirzapur; applicants Santoshi Devi and Jhabbu Bind; co-accused confessional statements; recovery 73 grams and 20 mg heroin; criminal history; interim anticipatory bail till 06.2.2026; personal bond Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties; supplementary affidavit direction; Jitendra Kumar Sinha, J.; decided January 16, 2026.

What did the court decide?

Interim anticipatory bail till 06.2.2026 on furnishing personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount, subject to stated conditions; supplementary affidavit on entire criminal history directed; case to be listed fresh on 06.2.2026. ¶7

Santoshi Devi and Another vs State of U.P. and Another — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶7

Issue for consideration

Whether applicants Santoshi Devi and Jhabbu Bind, arraigned in Case Crime No. 516 of 2025 under Sections 8/21/29 NDPS (Police Station Kotwali Dehat, District Mirzapur), are entitled to anticipatory bail in the event of arrest.

¶7

Court's answer

Interim anticipatory bail granted to applicants Santoshi Devi and Jhabbu Bind in the event of arrest, on furnishing personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount, till 06.2.2026, subject to conditions: no tampering with evidence and appearance before trial Court on dates fixed unless exempted; no inducement, threat or promise to dissuade disclosure of facts; co-operation during trial and no misuse of bail liberty; no leaving India without prior permission of the Court concerned. The Court expressly made no observation on the merits.

¶7

Ratio / Principle

In default of any of the bail conditions, the prosecution is at liberty to file an appropriate application for cancellation of the interim anticipatory bail.

¶19

Key takeaways

Applicants directed to file a supplementary affidavit bringing on record the entire criminal history by the next date fixed; case to be put up fresh on 06.2.2026.ratio¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail — NDPS Act, Ss. 8/21/29 — Applicants named in confessional statements of arrested co-accused Virendra Tiwari @ Suraj and Pappu Tiwari, from whose possession 73 grams and 20 mg of heroin allegedly recovered; applicant no.2 stated to have criminal history explained in memo of application; A.G.A. opposed stating complete criminal history not explained — Held: without expressing any opinion on merits, interim anticipatory bail granted till 06.2.2026 on personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount, subject to conditions (no tampering with evidence, appearance on fixed dates, no inducement/threat/promise, co-operation during trial, no misuse of liberty, no leaving India without permission); prosecution free to seek cancellation on breach; applicants to file supplementary affidavit disclosing entire criminal history by next date; case listed fresh on 06.2.2026 (Jitendra Kumar Sinha, J.).

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 242 of 2026

¶3

Santoshi Devi And Another .....Applicant(s) Versus State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Byas Kumar Prasad, Mulayam Yadav, Viveka Nand Maurya Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

¶4

Court No. - 72

¶5

HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.

¶6

Heard Sri Byas Kumar Prasad, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri B.P. Maurya, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime no. 516 of 2025 under Section 8/21/29 of NDPS, Police Station Kotwali Dehat, District Mirzapur with the prayer that in the event of arrest, the applicant may be released on bail.

¶8

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicants that names of the applicants have surfaced in the statements of co-accused Virendra Tiwari @ Suraj and Pappu Tiwari and from their possession 73 grams and 20 mg of heroine is said to have been recovered. It is also submitted that applicant no.2 has criminal history which has been explained in the memo of application. It was also submitted that the applicants undertake to co-operate during trial and they would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court and in case they are granted anticipatory bail, they shall not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶9

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and submits that applicants have not explained the complete criminal history.

¶10

Name of the applicant has surfaced in the confessional statement of arrested co-accused Virendra Tiwari @ Suraj and Pappu Tiwari and and

¶11

NABAIL No. 242 of 2026

¶12

¶13

from their possession 73 grams and 20 mg of heroine is said to have been recovered. The entire criminal history of the applicants has not been explained by them.

¶14

Considering the facts and circumstances and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicants Santoshi Devi and Jhabbu Bind in the event of their arrest, be released on interim anticipatory bail on their furnishing personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned till 06.2.2026 with the following conditions :-

¶15

(i) The applicants shall not tamper with evidence and they would appear before the trial Court on the date fixed unless exempted by the Court concerned;

¶16

(ii) The applicants 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/her/them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶17

(iii) The applicants would co-operate during trial and would not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶18

(iv) The applicants shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court concerned.

¶19

In default of any of the conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of the interim anticipatory bail granted to the applicants.

¶20

Put up this case as fresh on 06.2.2026.

¶21

Applicants are directed to file supplementary affidavit bringing on record the entire criminal history by the next date fixed.

¶22

(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)

¶23

January 16, 2026 Madhurima

¶24

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

Santoshi Devi and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santoshi Devi and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

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

Jheenak Yadav Alias Satyanarayan Yadav vs State of U.P.

Vishamveer Alias Vishambar Singh and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Sukhvinder Singh vs State of U.P. and Another

Jagveer Singh vs State of U.P. and Another

Guddu Alias Parvej Malik vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Ashok vs State of U.P.