High Court · 2025

1. Mr. Saurabh Kum ar Pandey, lear ned counsel for t he applicant . 2. Mr. Pankaj Joshi, learned A.G.A. for t he St at e. 3. Present applicant Him anshu Pandey is praying for regular bail in relat ion t o FI R dat ed 09.01.2025, regist ered as FI R No. 08 of 2025 at P.S. Nanakm at t a Dist rict U.S. Nagar wherein four persons present applicant t he offence punishable under Sect ion 8/ 20 of t he NDPS Act . 4. t he applicant subm it s t hat applicant is innocent and has been falsely im plicat ed and t he alleged cont raband ‘charas’ w hich is show n t o be recover ed from t he pr esent applicant is i.e., 1.120 kg. He com m ercial one, subm it s t hat t her e are t ot al four accused per sons and t wo accused, from ot her nam ely, Manoj Singh and Har Singh t he cont raband which was Faraswan, show n non- recovered was com m ercial and bot h of t hem have already been enlar ged on bail. t he applicant 5. Lear ned counsel far as alleged furt her subm it s t o be cont raband, w hich recover ed t he pr esent applicant which is com m ercial one is concer ned, in fact , at t he t im e of search and seizur e t her e subst ant ial com pliance of Sect ion 50 of t he NDPS Act which, in fact , was m andat ory. He subm it s t hat t he ent ire pr ocedur e, as adopt ed, at t he t im e of search and seizure fault y since aft er m aking com plet ely sear ch on t he pr esent applicant in r espect of t he r em aining accused, no procedure as t hat so proper t o t hat it self t here less possibilit y followed w hich t he t hat even prescribed under Sect ion 50 of t he NDPS Act has been r ecovery m em o. He evident subm it s it was a chance recovery, it is m andat ory t o follow t he procedure as pr escribed under Sect ion 50 of t he NDPS Act . He furt her subm it s t hat not only t his even t here is no proper subst ant ial com pliance of Sect ion 42 of t he NDPS Act and also point ed out t hat no such consent let t er was pr epared at t he t im e of search. 6. Mr. Pande furt her point ed out t hat as is no subst ant ial com pliance of t her e Sect ion 50 of t he NDPS Act w hich it self reveals t hat t he applicant is not guilt y of t he offence as alleged t o be com m it t ed. 7. Apart from t his, Mr. Pande subm it s t hat t he applicant has no crim inal hist ory and if t he applicant is adm it t ed t o bail t hen t he applicant aft er being released on bail will com m it such offence w hile on bail or m isuse t he bail. 8. The count er affidavit has been filed by t he prosecut ion wherein it is cont ended recovery, it was a chance t hat since t her efore, t her e was no need t o com ply t he procedure as prescribed under Sect ion 50 of t he NDPS Act . On t his, Mr. Pande, point ed out it was a chance recovery t hen aft er search and seizure of t he first accused it was m andat ory on t he part of t he invest igat ing officer t o com ply wit h t he procedure as prescribed under Sect ion 50 of t he NDPS Act against rest of t he accused w hich adm it t edly has not been done and t his fact has not been disput ed by Mr. Joshi, learned A.G.A. 9. Mr. Joshi poined out t hat since t he alleged cont raband recovered t he applicant is com m ercial one, t her efore, in view of Sect ion 37 of t he NDPS Act , t he applicant does not deserve for bail. He furt her subm it s t hat even if t he applicant t he has no crim inal hist ory even applicant cannot be released on bail since t hen t hat t he t hat t o be r eveals persons, is show n t he procedure t he possession of com m er cial t he alleged cont raband show n recover ed is com m er cial one. 10. Aft er hearing t he argum ent s of t he learned counsel for t he part ies, adm it t edly t o be t he cont raband which recover ed t he applicant quant it y, t win condit ion as st ipulat ed t her efore, under Sect ion 37 of t he NDPS Act has t o be dealt wit h. So far as ar gum ent s as advanced by Mr. Pande wit h r egard t o t he non com pliance of t he procedure as prescribed under Sect ion 50 of t he NDPS is concer ned, on per usal of t he r ecovery fact while m em o t he conduct ing search and seizur e on procedur e accused prescribed under Sect ion 50 of t he NDPS Act is com plet ely overlooked. Even if it was a chance r ecovery t hen aft er search of t he fir st accused t he invest igat ing officer should com ply wit h respect of t he r em aining accused , which in fact is t he m andat e of Sect ion 50 of t he NDPS Act , t herefore, t his Court is pr im arily t her e ar e r easonable ground for believing t hat t he applicant is not guilt y of t he offence as alleged. 11. Apart t he applicant have no any crim inal ant ecedent which has also not been disput ed by t he learned A.G.A., t herefor e, t his Cour t is of t he view t hat if t he applicant is adm it t ed t o bail t hen he is not likely t o com m it any offence w hile on bail, even t hat pur pose som e st r ingent condit ion can be im posed so t hat t here m ay not be any possibilit y for m isusing t he bail. 12. Aft er t aking int o considerat ion t he subm issions as advanced by t he learned counsel for t he part ies, t his Court is of t he view t hat since t win condit ion as st ipulat ed under Sect ion 37 of t he NDPS Act are fulfilled in view of t he observat ions as m ade above, and, as such t he applicant deserves for bail. 13. Accordingly, wit hout ex pressing any t his, adm it t edly t he view t hat opinion on t he m erit of t he case, t he bail applicat ion is allowed. 14. Let t he applicant Him anshu Pandey be r eleased on bail on his execut ing a per sonal bond and fur nishing t wo reliable sur et ies of t he sat isfact ion of t he court concerned. I t is m ade clear t hat aft er being 15. released on bail if t he applicant is found t o be indulged in any such act ivit y of t he sam e nat ur e, t hen t he prosecut ion is free t o m ove an applicat ion for cancellat ion of bail of t he applicant . like am ount t he t o Parul ( Ra k e sh Th a p l i y a l , J.) 2 2 .0 5 .2 0 2 5