SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(All) 1091

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Jitendra Kumar Sinha, J
MUSTAHID ALIAS BHURA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF U.P. – Respondent
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14437 of 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Surendra Narayan Mishra
For the Respondents: G.A.

Bail may be granted in NDPS cases where the recovered quantity of contraband is below the commercial threshold, provided the court is satisfied with the totality of facts and the requirements of Section 37 of the NDPS Act.

Headnote:The applicant sought bail under S. 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in connection with Case Crime No. 50 of 2026, involving S. 8/21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act. The prosecution alleged the recovery of 21 grams of smack from the applicant's possession. The court noted that the recovered quantity was below the commercial threshold and observed that mandatory provisions of S. 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act were allegedly not complied with. The primary issue was whether the applicant was entitled to bail given the nature of the offense and his criminal history. The court reasoned that upon considering the totality of facts, the evidence on record, and the provisions of S. 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act, as well as judicial precedents, the applicant was a fit candidate for bail, especially since the quantity was not commercial. Hence, the present bail application is allowed.

Table of Content
1. application for bail based on the recovery of a non-commercial quantity of narcotics and alleged procedural non-compliance. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5)
2. grant of bail in ndps cases when the quantity is below commercial limits and section 37 is considered. (Para 6)
3. imposition of conditions for release on bail to ensure trial integrity and presence of the accused. (Para 7 , 8 , 9)

1. Heard Shri Surendra Narayan Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, and Shri B.P. Maurya, learned AGA for the State-respondents and perused the record.

2. 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. 50 of 2026, under Section 8/21 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, registered at Police Station Gangoh, District Saharanpur, during pendency of the trial.

3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case due to ulterior motive. It is further submitted that 21 Gram of smack is said to have been recovered from the possession of the applicant, which is much below the commercial quantity. It is further submitted that the mandatory provisions of Section 50 of N.D.P.S. Act have not been complied with. The applicant is languishing in jail since 24.01.2026 and the applicant is having criminal history of three cases, which has been duly explained in the memo of application, 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.

4. Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant.

5. As per allegations in the first information report, 21 Gram of smack is said to have been recovered from the possession of the applicant, which is much below the commercial quantity. It is further submitted that the mandatory provisions of Section 50 of N.D.P.S. Act have not been complied with. The applicant is languishing in jail since 24.01.2026 and the applicant is having criminal history of three cases, which has been duly explained in the memo of application.

6. Upon considering the totality of facts, nature and the evidence reflected from record and also taking into consideration the provision of Section 37 of N.D.P.S. Act and the law laid down in the case of Union of India vs Shiv Shanker Kesari (2007) 7 SCC 798 without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for bail. Hence, the present bail application is allowed.

7. Let the applicant- Mustahid alias Bhura involved in the aforesaid case crime shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned :-

(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.

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

(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.

(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.

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

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

9. It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose of determinati

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top