BAIL/43139/2025 of SATYAPRAKASH SHIVHARE ALIAS SONU SHIVHARE AND ANOTHER Vs STATE OF U.P.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 43139 of 2025 Court No. - 69 HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J. 1. Heard Sri Santosh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Chandra Shekhar Saran, , 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 applicants with a prayer to release them on bail in Case Crime No. 48 of 2025 , under Section 8, 20, 29, 60 NDPS Act, registered at Police Station Markundi, District Chitrakoot, during pendency of the trial. 3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that applicants are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in this case and they have  been languishing in jail since 5.11.2025.  It is further submitted that  co-accused Gangaram Kuswaha and Harish Chandra Shivhare have already been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 25.2.2206 and 9.3.2026 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Applications No. 43146 of 2025 and 43009 of 2025 respectively. It is further submitted that as per FIR the applicant no. 1 and co-accused Gangaram Kuswaha were travelling in Bolero vehicle and from whose possession 40 kg of ganja is said to have recovered and applicant no. 2 and co-accused Harish Chandra Shivhare were travelling in a separate vehicle and from whose possession 40kg  of ganja is said to have been recovered, however, nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the applicants.   It is further submitted that mandatory Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Santosh Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Satyaprakash Shivhare Alias Sonu Shivhare And Another .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) provisions of Section 52-A of NDPS Act have not been complied with and provisions of Section 105 BNS have also not been strictly complied with.  It is also submitted that the applicants undertake that they 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 mandatory provisions of Section 52-A of NDPS Act have been complied with and provisions of Section 105 BNS have also been strictly complied with as the videography of the recovery has been made from the mobile phone of Constable Ashish Yadav.  5. Co-accused Gangaram Kuswaha and Harish Chandra Shivhare have already been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court. A s per FIR the applicant no. 1 and co-accused Gangaram Kuswaha are said to be travelling in Bolero vehicle and from whose possession 40 kg of ganja is said to have recovered and applicant no. 2 and co-accused Harish Chandra Shivhare are said to be travelling in a separate vehicle and from whose possession 40kg  of ganja is said to have been recovered, however, it is submitted that nothing is said have been recovered from the conscious possession of the applicants. It is submitted that mandatory provisions of Section 52-A of NDPS Act have not been complied with and provisions of Section 105 BNS have also not been strictly complied with and the videography has not been made made on the required App rather it has been made from a mobile phone of one of the constables.  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 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 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 applicants- Satyaprakash Shivhare Alias Sonu Shivhare and Ravi Shivhare involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in BAIL No. 43139 of 2025 2 the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions :- (i) The applicants 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 applicants shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses. (iii) The applicants 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 applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in the trial court. (v) The applicants 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 23, 2026 Abhishek BAIL No. 43139 of 2025 3 (Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)