Vikas Babu v. State Of Up Through Secretary For Home Affiars Up At Lucknow

1. Heard Sri Mayank Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Pradeep Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.99 of 2024, under Sections 8/20 NDPS Act, Police Station- GRP Agra Cantt, District- Agra, during pendency of the trial in the court below.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that this is the second bail application filed on behalf of the applicant and his first bail application has been dismissed after considering the fact that from the possession of the applicant 21.3 Kg. ganja was recovered, which was commercial quantity but he is pressing the instant second bail application on the ground that applicant is in jail in the present matter since 02.04.2024 i.e. for last almost one and half years but till date, out of 15 witnesses of the charge-sheet, only one witness could be examined.

4. He next submits that trial of the case is moving with languid pace and there is no hope of its early disposal.

5. He further submits that even commercial quantity of ganja is 20 Kg. and therefore, slightly more than prescribed commercial quantity of ganja allegedly was recovered from the possession of the applicant.

6. He next submits that as per the observation made by the Apex Court in the case of Mohd. Muslim alias Hussain Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) 2023 SCC 2 BAIL No. 10689 of 2025 OnLine SC 352 on the ground of long incarceration and languid pace of the trial even an accused facing trial under the provisions of NDPS Act can be released on bail.

7. He further submits that applicant is having no other criminal history to his credit.

8. Per contra; learned A.G.A. however opposed the prayer for bail and submits this is the second bail application filed on behalf of the applicant and his first bail application has been dismissed after considering the fact that from his possession commercial quantity of ganja was recovered but could not dispute the fact that commercial quantity of ganja is 20 Kg. and from the possession of the applicant 21.3 kg. ganja was allegedly recovered.

9. He further could not dispute the fact that applicant is in jail in the present matter since 02.04.2024 i.e. for last almost one and half years and till date, out of 15 witnesses of the charge-sheet, only one could be examined.

10. He further could not dispute the fact that applicant is having no criminal history to his credit.

11. I have heard both the parties and perused the record of the case.

12. However this is the second bail application filed on behalf of the applicant and his first bail application has been dismissed after considering the fact that from the possession of the applicant 21.3 KG ganja was recovered, which is commercial quantity but it reflects applicant is in jail in the present matter for last almost one and half years and till date, only one prosecution witness could be examined, out of 15 witnesses of the charge- sheet, therefore, it appears that trial of the case is moving with languid pace and there is no hope of its early disposal.

13. The Apex Court in the case of Mohd. Muslim alias Hussain (supra) on which reliance was placed by learned counsel for the applicant, observed that even in cases relate to NDPS Act on the ground of long incarceration and slow speed of the trial, an accused can be released on bail.

14. Further, law is settled, right of speedy trial is the fundamental right of an accused and on its violation, even in cases relate to Special Act, he can be released on bail. Considering the facts of the case, it cannot be said that fundamental right of speedy trial of the applicant has not been violated. 3 BAIL No. 10689 of 2025

15. Further, commercial quantity of ganja is 20 kg. and as per allegation from the possession of the applicant 21.3 kg. ganja was recorded, which was slightly more than the prescribed commercial quantity of the ganja.

16. Further, applicant is having no criminal history to his credit.

17. Further, law is settled, unless proven guilty an accused is deemed to be innocent and his bail application should not be dismissed either for preventive or punitive purpose.

18. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

19. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed.

20. Let the applicant- Vikas Babu, be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted. (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make 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 any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.

21. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.

22. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. September 9, 2025 AK Pandey (Sameer Jain,J.) ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

1. Heard Sri Mayank Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Pradeep Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.99 of 2024, under Sections 8/20 NDPS Act, Police Station- GRP Agra Cantt, District- Agra, during pendency of the trial in the court below.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that this is the second bail application filed on behalf of the applicant and his first bail application has been dismissed after considering the fact that from the possession of the applicant 21.3 Kg. ganja was recovered, which was commercial quantity but he is pressing the instant second bail application on the ground that applicant is in jail in the present matter since 02.04.2024 i.e. for last almost one and half years but till date, out of 15 witnesses of the charge-sheet, only one witness could be examined.

4. He next submits that trial of the case is moving with languid pace and there is no hope of its early disposal.

5. He further submits that even commercial quantity of ganja is 20 Kg. and therefore, slightly more than prescribed commercial quantity of ganja allegedly was recovered from the possession of the applicant.

6. He next submits that as per the observation made by the Apex Court in the case of Mohd. Muslim alias Hussain Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) 2023 SCC 2 BAIL No. 10689 of 2025 OnLine SC 352 on the ground of long incarceration and languid pace of the trial even an accused facing trial under the provisions of NDPS Act can be released on bail.

7. He further submits that applicant is having no other criminal history to his credit.

8. Per contra; learned A.G.A. however opposed the prayer for bail and submits this is the second bail application filed on behalf of the applicant and his first bail application has been dismissed after considering the fact that from his possession commercial quantity of ganja was recovered but could not dispute the fact that commercial quantity of ganja is 20 Kg. and from the possession of the applicant 21.3 kg. ganja was allegedly recovered.

9. He further could not dispute the fact that applicant is in jail in the present matter since 02.04.2024 i.e. for last almost one and half years and till date, out of 15 witnesses of the charge-sheet, only one could be examined.

10. He further could not dispute the fact that applicant is having no criminal history to his credit.

11. I have heard both the parties and perused the record of the case.

12. However this is the second bail application filed on behalf of the applicant and his first bail application has been dismissed after considering the fact that from the possession of the applicant 21.3 KG ganja was recovered, which is commercial quantity but it reflects applicant is in jail in the present matter for last almost one and half years and till date, only one prosecution witness could be examined, out of 15 witnesses of the charge- sheet, therefore, it appears that trial of the case is moving with languid pace and there is no hope of its early disposal.

13. The Apex Court in the case of Mohd. Muslim alias Hussain (supra) on which reliance was placed by learned counsel for the applicant, observed that even in cases relate to NDPS Act on the ground of long incarceration and slow speed of the trial, an accused can be released on bail.

14. Further, law is settled, right of speedy trial is the fundamental right of an accused and on its violation, even in cases relate to Special Act, he can be released on bail. Considering the facts of the case, it cannot be said that fundamental right of speedy trial of the applicant has not been violated. 3 BAIL No. 10689 of 2025

15. Further, commercial quantity of ganja is 20 kg. and as per allegation from the possession of the applicant 21.3 kg. ganja was recorded, which was slightly more than the prescribed commercial quantity of the ganja.

16. Further, applicant is having no criminal history to his credit.

17. Further, law is settled, unless proven guilty an accused is deemed to be innocent and his bail application should not be dismissed either for preventive or punitive purpose.

18. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

19. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed.

20. Let the applicant- Vikas Babu, be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted. (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make 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 any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.

21. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.

22. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. September 9, 2025 AK Pandey (Sameer Jain,J.) ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad