BAIL/11221/2026 of NITAI SARKAR Vs STATE OF U.P.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11221 of 2026 Court No. - 69 HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J. 1. Heard Sri Anurag Vajpeyi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri O.P. Singh, 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. 513 of 2025 under Section 8/20 NDPS Act and 317(5) BNS registered at Police Station Phase-I, NOIDA, District Gautam Budh Nagar during pendency of the trial. 3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant has been falsely implicated in this case and he has been languishing in jail since 04.2.2025. It is further submitted that 64 kg of Ganja is said to have been recovered from the possession of the applicant and mandatory provisions of Sections 52-A and 57 of NDPS Act have not been complied with. It is further submitted that applicant has criminal history of five cases relating to NDPS Act which has been explained in the memo of application. 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. 4. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant and submits that mandatory provisions of Sections 52-A and 57 of NDPS Act have been complied with and the alleged recovered Ganja comes within the purview of commercial quantity. He further submits that applicant is a resident of West Bengal.  5. 64 kg of Ganja is said to have been recovered from the possession of the applicant and it is submitted that mandatory provisions of Sections 52-A and 57 of NDPS Act have not been complied with. Applicant has criminal history of five cases relating to NDPS Act which has been explained in the memo of application. 6. Upon considering the totality of facts, nature and evidence reflected from record, Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Anurag Vajpeyi, Prateek Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Nitai Sarkar .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) taking into consideration the provision of Section 37 of the NDPS Act and in view of the law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in Union of India vs. Shiv Shanker Kesari, 2007 (7) SCC 798 and Nadeem Ahmad vs. State of West Bengal 2025 LawSuit (SC) 1134 (2025 INSC 993), 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 Nitai Sarkar involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties (one of the surety must be a local resident) each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions :- (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 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.  April 20, 2026 Madhurima BAIL No. 11221 of 2026 2 (Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)