HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD Subhash Yadav .....Revisionist(s)

Versus State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s)

Counsel for Revisionist(s) : Indrajeet Kumar Shukla, Kaushal Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 87 HON'BLE ABDUL SHAHID, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist and the learned AGA for the State.

2. The present criminal revision has been preferred assailing the impugned order dated 11.11.2025, passed by the Special Judge NDPS Act/Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.1, Ghazipur in Criminal Case No. 1134 of 2023 (State Vs. Rajesh Singh Yadav and others) in Case Crime No. 0065 of 2023, under Section 8/21 of NDPS, Police Station Rampur Manjha, District Ghazipur, whereby the discharge application moved by the revisionist has been rejected.

3. Learned counsel for the revisionist has submitted that the revisionist has filed discharge application which has wrongly and arbitrarily been rejected by the learned trial court by the impugned order aforesaid. The revisionist has been impleaded in the said offence only on the basis of statement of co-accused. He further submitted that there is no compliance of Section 52A of NDPS Act.

4. Learned AGA has opposed the criminal revision and submitted that the role of the revisionist has been found during investigation and after complete of investigation, charge sheet has been filed against him and he is named in the FIR. The criminal revision is liable to be dismissed. The objection raised by the learned counsel for the revisionist has to be seen at the stage of trial.

5. Learned counsel for the revisionist has relied on the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Yusuf @ Asif Vs. State; 2023 (7) S 145. It is the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Criminal Appeal, which had been preferred against conviction of the appellant, whereas in the present matter, the question of discharge has to be considered. Hence, the present law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court is not much value in favour of the revisionist as the entire trial in the present case is pending and the final finding is still to be recorded by the learned trial court.

6. Learned counsel for the revisionist has further relied on a judgment of this Court in Ajay Kumar Kashyap and another Vs. State of U.P.; 2024:AHC: 185277, wherein the revisionists there had been discharged by this Court.

7. In the present offence, there has been recovery of 1170 gms illegal heroine and four persons were arrested under Section 8/21 of NDPS Act and one vehicle bearing Safari UP-50 AP0010 has also been recovered. The date of incident is 15.10.2023. It is alleged that four persons have been came out from the said vehicle, namely, Rajesh Singh Yadav alias Rangeela, Ankit Singh, Manohar Lal and Durga Lal and one person had flood away. Rajesh Singh Yadav said that he is my brother and his name is Subhash Yadav son of late Sita Ram.

8. It is alleged in the FIR that alleged polythene has been thrown away by the offenders and Subhash Yadav flood away from the spot and arrested persons told that this polythene is having heroine and it was weighed 250 gm.

9. After investigation, charge sheet has been filed against all the five accused persons, four accused, who were arrested on the spot as well as the revisionist-Subhash Yadav, who is alleged to have flood away from the spot. His name came on record on the basis of statement of co-

accused. There has been no recovery from him.

10. In view thereof, the matter requires consideration.

11. Issue notice to opposite party no.2.

12. Learned AGA is directed to file counter affidavit within three weeks.

Rejoinder affidavit, if any, may be filed within two weeks thereafter.

13. Meanwhile, further proceedings of Criminal Case No. 1134 of 2023 (State Vs. Rajesh Singh Yadav and others) in Case Crime No. 0065 of 2023, under Section 8/21 of NDPS, Police Station Rampur Manjha, District Ghazipur, pending in the court of Special Judge NDPS Act/Additional Sessions Judge, Court N