Union Of India Thru. Cbn vs Party(s)

1.Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. S.M.Singh Royekwar, learned counsel for CBN, assisted by Mr. Vaibhav Saxena, Advocate. and perused the record.

2.The present bail application has been filed seeking bail in case crime/F.I.R No.03/2025/CBN/LKO under Sections 8/22/29 of NDPS Act, P.S. CBN, District Lucknow.

3.In the prosecution case it is alleged that on the basis of secret information received on 12.05.2025 a team was constituted by the Central Bureau of Narcotics under the leadership of Sub-Inspector Avanish Bhaadu and two independent witnesses were also taken along with him. At about 19:15 hours, a boy wearing black T-shirt near Parvati Complex started picking up the Cartoon near the road. Upon that Avinash Bhaadu inquired from him who told his name Ali Akhtar Rizvi, he was made aware about the secret information with the team that these Cartoon contained illegal Pentazocine injection and he has to be searched. He was made aware about his right under Section 50 of the NDPS Act. He gave written permission for the search. On search made in front of punch 2 BAIL No. 6204 of 2025 witnesses, 15 Cartoons Pentazocine injection have been found. Ali Akhtar Rizvi has informed that these consignments belong to one Prabhat Dubey another co-accused. It is alleged that Prabhat Dubey works in M/S Pragati Enterprises. He further told that these consignments have to be shifted to M/S Minemed Transport Nagar, Lucknow. Prabhat Dubey was called on the spot who told that these Cartoons belong to M/S Shri Agency Ameenabad and have to be sent to M/S Minemed Transport Nagar, Lucknow. Both the accused could not show any legal document regarding the transport of these Pentazocine injection.

4.Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has no criminal antecedent. The applicant has not been found in possession of the narcotic drugs seized by the prosecution. The applicant is a valid licensee having a licence in the name of Pragati Enterprises. The wife of the applicant also is a licensee running Shree Agency. It is submitted by the applicant's counsel that except the statement of the co-accused Ali Akhtar Rizvi that the seized drugs were being supplied to the accused applicant, there is no other material at this stage against the applicant. The recovery is not from the premises of the applicant. The wife of the applicant has not been made accused. The dealer S.S. Biotech by whom these narcotic medicines have been shipped have not been made accused also. The co-accused Raghvendra Singh to whom these drugs had to be supplied and who has an agency in the name of Minemet has been granted interim protection vide order dated 25.7.2025 passed by this court in Anticipatory Bail No.908 of 2025.

5.Learned counsel for the Union of India, on the other hand submits that the godown of the wife of the applicant is in Aminabad. The drugs have been seized outside Parvati Complex in Rajajipuram. Statement of Ali Akhtar Rizvi has been given under section 67 of NDPS Act. It is submitted that the investigation is still going on.

6.Considering the above aspect of the matter, perusal of the record as well as the fact that applicant has no criminal antecedent, the provisions of Section 8 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act as well as Rule 65A of the 3 BAIL No. 6204 of 2025 NDPS Rules so also the provisions of Drugs and Cosmetics Act, the fact that prima facie there appears to be no recovery from the applicant or his premises, undertaking given by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant will cooperate in the investigation, bail order of the co-accused, referred to above, twin condition under section 37 of NDPS Act appears to have been, prima facie, satisfied, the applicant is in jail since

13.5.2025, tit is a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

7.Let the applicant Prabhat Dubey 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 which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- (i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) 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. (iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A I.P.C. (now 269 BNS) (vi) In case the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. (now 84 BNSS) is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A I.P.C. (now 209 BNS). 4 BAIL No. 6204 of 2025

8.The application is allowed accordingly. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are confined to the present bail application and shall have no bearing on the merit of the trial. October 13, 2025 kkb/ (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) KRISHNA KUMAR BARANWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

1.Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. S.M.Singh Royekwar, learned counsel for CBN, assisted by Mr. Vaibhav Saxena, Advocate. and perused the record.

2.The present bail application has been filed seeking bail in case crime/F.I.R No.03/2025/CBN/LKO under Sections 8/22/29 of NDPS Act, P.S. CBN, District Lucknow.

3.In the prosecution case it is alleged that on the basis of secret information received on 12.05.2025 a team was constituted by the Central Bureau of Narcotics under the leadership of Sub-Inspector Avanish Bhaadu and two independent witnesses were also taken along with him. At about 19:15 hours, a boy wearing black T-shirt near Parvati Complex started picking up the Cartoon near the road. Upon that Avinash Bhaadu inquired from him who told his name Ali Akhtar Rizvi, he was made aware about the secret information with the team that these Cartoon contained illegal Pentazocine injection and he has to be searched. He was made aware about his right under Section 50 of the NDPS Act. He gave written permission for the search. On search made in front of punch 2 BAIL No. 6204 of 2025 witnesses, 15 Cartoons Pentazocine injection have been found. Ali Akhtar Rizvi has informed that these consignments belong to one Prabhat Dubey another co-accused. It is alleged that Prabhat Dubey works in M/S Pragati Enterprises. He further told that these consignments have to be shifted to M/S Minemed Transport Nagar, Lucknow. Prabhat Dubey was called on the spot who told that these Cartoons belong to M/S Shri Agency Ameenabad and have to be sent to M/S Minemed Transport Nagar, Lucknow. Both the accused could not show any legal document regarding the transport of these Pentazocine injection.

4.Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has no criminal antecedent. The applicant has not been found in possession of the narcotic drugs seized by the prosecution. The applicant is a valid licensee having a licence in the name of Pragati Enterprises. The wife of the applicant also is a licensee running Shree Agency. It is submitted by the applicant's counsel that except the statement of the co-accused Ali Akhtar Rizvi that the seized drugs were being supplied to the accused applicant, there is no other material at this stage against the applicant. The recovery is not from the premises of the applicant. The wife of the applicant has not been made accused. The dealer S.S. Biotech by whom these narcotic medicines have been shipped have not been made accused also. The co-accused Raghvendra Singh to whom these drugs had to be supplied and who has an agency in the name of Minemet has been granted interim protection vide order dated 25.7.2025 passed by this court in Anticipatory Bail No.908 of 2025.

5.Learned counsel for the Union of India, on the other hand submits that the godown of the wife of the applicant is in Aminabad. The drugs have been seized outside Parvati Complex in Rajajipuram. Statement of Ali Akhtar Rizvi has been given under section 67 of NDPS Act. It is submitted that the investigation is still going on.

6.Considering the above aspect of the matter, perusal of the record as well as the fact that applicant has no criminal antecedent, the provisions of Section 8 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act as well as Rule 65A of the 3 BAIL No. 6204 of 2025 NDPS Rules so also the provisions of Drugs and Cosmetics Act, the fact that prima facie there appears to be no recovery from the applicant or his premises, undertaking given by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant will cooperate in the investigation, bail order of the co-accused, referred to above, twin condition under section 37 of NDPS Act appears to have been, prima facie, satisfied, the applicant is in jail since

13.5.2025, tit is a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

7.Let the applicant Prabhat Dubey 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 which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- (i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) 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. (iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A I.P.C. (now 269 BNS) (vi) In case the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. (now 84 BNSS) is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A I.P.C. (now 209 BNS). 4 BAIL No. 6204 of 2025

8.The application is allowed accordingly. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are confined to the present bail application and shall have no bearing on the merit of the trial. October 13, 2025 kkb/ (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) KRISHNA KUMAR BARANWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench