BAIL/19352/2025 of MANISH KUMAR Vs STATE OF U.P.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 19352 of 2025 Court No. - 68 HON'BLE ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA, J. Heard Sri Manish Tiwary, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Ajay Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Arimardan Yadav, learned AGA for the State and perused the record. The instant second bail application under Section 483 BNSS at the instance of the applicant Manish Kumar has been filed seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No.391 of 2024, under Section 8/21-C of NDPS Act, 1985, Police Station Lisarigate, District Meerut, during pendency of the trial in the court below. The first bail application was rejected by this Court vide order dated 17.12.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.42316 of 2024. The applicant is stated to be incarcerated in jail since 17.10.2024. Sri Manish Tiwary, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the applicant while pressing the second bail plea of the applicant contends that the applicant has been implicated in the instant case crime number on the strength of recovery of 614 grams of smack from a Swift Dzire vehicle bearing Registration No.UP15 CM 8442 driven by the applicant. The applicant has no criminal antecedents and has been falsely implicated in this very case for ulterior motives. In furtherance of his submissions learned Senior Counsel contends that a land dispute exists between the applicant's father and one Jaiveer in which both parties were challaned on 10.04.2024 under Section 107/116 CrPC (Annexure-3 to the bail application). The constable Sushil Bhati posted in Ante Narcotics Task Force, Meerut is a relative of Jaiveer. On 16.10.2024 said Sushil Bhati Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ajay Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Manish Kumar .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) alongwith some other police personnel came to the house of the applicant without any search warrant searched the house and broke articles and left after threatening for false implication. On 16.10.2024 at 10.43 hours the police personnel took the applicant and his vehicle to State Highway-14, Mahmood Nagar, Fatehpur Road, Meerut and showed false recovery of contraband narcotics and implicated the applicant in the present case. Sri Tiwary has relied heavily on averments made in paragraphs-32 to 40 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application to substantiate his submission regarding the false implication of the applicant in the instant case crime number. It is also argued that the charge sheet against the applicant has already been filed on 10.04.2025. The case is proceeding at a snail's pace  and as such, further custodial interrogation of the applicant is no longer required. Hence, bail has been prayed for. Per contra, learned AGA has vehemently opposed the bail plea by submitting that from the possession of the accused applicant 614 grams of smack (394 grams smack and 220 grams cut for increasing the quantity of smack), two mobile phones and a Maruti Dzire Car, 15 bundles packing paper were recovered. The recovery memo was prepared, samples taken and sent for forensic examination but report is still awaited. The applicant is involved in trafficking of contraband smack and during the course of investigation credible and concrete evidence has been collected which proves the complicity of the applicant and the crime. The averments made in paragraphs-32 to 40 of the bail application have been specifically denied in paragraphs-21 to 29 of the counter affidavit and it has been averred that no relation has been found between Jaiveer and Sushil Bhati. Besides Sushil Bhati has also not been found in the video sent by mother of the applicant on pen-drive. It is also submitted that the applicant has been arrested and from his possession huge quantity of illegal drug smack (heroin) alongwith sealing equipment was recovered which is valued at more than Rs.50 lakhs. Considering all above facts and circumstances, period of incarceration,  the nature of accusations, progress of case at a snail's pace,  larger mandate of Article 21 of the constitution of India, the nature of accusations, the nature of evidence in support thereof, the severity of BAIL No. 19352 of 2025 2 punishment which conviction will entail, the character of the accused- applicant, circumstances which are peculiar to the accused, reasonable possibility of securing the presence of the accused at the trial, reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered with, the larger interest of the public/ State and other circumstances, but without expressing any opinion on the merits, I am of the view that it is a fit case for grant of bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant Manish Kumar involved in abovesaid case crime  be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that :- 1. The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial. 2. The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment. 3. The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. January 27, 2026 Ravi /Shahroj BAIL No. 19352 of 2025 3 (Ashutosh Srivastava,J.)