BAIL/14257/2026 of RAHUL KORI @ MUSA @ RAJESH Vs STATE OF U.P.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14257 of 2026 Court No. - 69 HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J. 1. Heard Sri Anubhav Sinha, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri B.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. 22 of 2026 under Section 8/20 NDPS Act, registered at Police Station Madhuban Bapudham, District Ghaziabad during pendency of the trial. 3. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and 36 kg of ganja is said to have been recovered from a vehicle in which the applicant and two other accused persons were found travelling. It is further submitted that mandatory provisions of section 52-A of NDPS Act have not been complied with and co-accused Rahul Sharma and Abhay @ Gaurav have been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 01.4.2026 and 09.4.2026 passed in Crl. Misc. Bail Application Nos. 7088 of 2026 and 12070 of 2026 respectively. It is further submitted that applicant has criminal history of 19 cases out of which, he is on bail in 15 cases, he has been acquitted in three cases and one case is not related to him. It is further submitted that applicant is languishing in jail since 19.1.2026 and he 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. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Anubhav Sinha Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Rahul Kori @ Musa @ Rajesh .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 4. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant and submits that applicant is habitual offender of offences relating to NDPS Act having criminal history of 13 cases.  5. As per the FIR, 36 kg of ganja is said to have been recovered from a vehicle in which the applicant and two other accused persons were found travelling, however, it is submitted that mandatory provisions of section 52-A of NDPS Act have not been complied with. Co-accused Rahul Sharma and Abhay @ Gaurav have been granted bail by this Court. Applicant has criminal history of 19 cases which has been explained in the memo of application and he is languishing in jail since 19.1.2026 6. Upon considering the totality of facts, nature and evidence reflected from record, 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  Rahul Kori @ Musa @ Rajesh  involved in the aforesaid case crime 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 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 BAIL No. 14257 of 2026 2 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.  May 6, 2026 Madhurima BAIL No. 14257 of 2026 3 (Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.) Digitally signed by :- MADHURIMA GARG High Court of Judicature at Allahabad