Deepak Alias Dipoopal v. State of U.P

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 29807 of 2025 Court No. - 87 HON'BLE SANTOSH RAI, J.

¶1Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondents and perused the record.

¶2This bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been moved on behalf of accused-applicant Deepak Alias Dipoopal, seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 687 of 2025 under Section 21/22 N.D.P.S. Act, Police Station-Highway, District-Mathura during pendency of trial.

¶3Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that he has not committed any offence as alleged in the First Information Report. He further submits that there is no independent witness of the alleged recovery. He next submitted that the accused-applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that mandatory provision of Section 42, 50 and 57 of N.D.P.S. Act has not been complied with. There is no public witness of recovery of 550 grams of alpazolam from the possession of the applicant. The applicant has no criminal antecedent to his credit. He is languishing in jail since 30.07.2025. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶4Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that 550 grams of Alpazolam was recovered from the possession of accused applicant which is more than the commercial quantity. He next submitted that mandatory provisions of the Section 42, 50 and 57 of N.D.P.S. has been duly complied with. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Gaya Prasad Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Deepak Alias Dipoopal .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s)

¶5Regarding bail application under N.D.P.S. Act it is pertinent to mention Section 37 of N.D.P.S. Act. Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act reads as under:-"37. Offences to be cognizable and non-bailable.-(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974)-

(a) every offence punishable under this Act shall be cognizable;

(b) no person accused of an offence punishable for offences under section 19 or section 24 or section 27A and also for offences involving commercial quantity shall be released on bail or on his own bond unless-

(i) the Public Prosecutor has been given an opportunity to oppose the application for such release, and

(ii) where the Public Prosecutor opposes the application, the court is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that he is not guilty of such offence and that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail.

(2) The limitations on granting of bail specified in clause (b) of sub-section

(1) are in addition to the limitations under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or any other law for the time being in force, on granting of bail."

¶6Thus, the conditions which courts have to be cognizant of are that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is "not guilty of such offence" and that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail, "not guilty" means that it can only be a prima facie determination.

¶7In State of Punjab Vs. Baldev Singh 1999 (6) SCC 172 the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the compliance of Section 50 N.D.P.S. Act is mandatory. ".....That when an empowered officer or a duly authorised officer acting on prior information is about to search a person, it is imperative for him to inform the person concerned of his right under sub-section (1) of Section 50 of being taken to the nearest gazetted officer or the nearest Magistrate for making the search......"

(2) That failure to inform the person concerned about the existence of his right to be searched before a gazetted officer or a Magistrate would cause prejudice to an accused."

¶8In the decisions in Pankaj Bansal v. Union of India 2024 (7) SCC 576, Prabir Purkayastha v. State (NCT of Delhi) 2024(8) SCC 254 and Vihaan Kumar v. State of Haryana AIR 2025 SC 1388, it has been held that the requirement of informing a person of grounds for arrest is a mandatory requirement of Article 22(1) and also that the information of the grounds for arrest must be provided to the arrested person in such a manner that sufficient knowledge of the basic facts confuting the grounds imparted and communicate to the arrested person effectively in the language which he understands.

¶9Considering all above facts and circumstances, the nature of accusations, twin principles as laid down in Section 37 of N.D.P.S. Act, quantum of recovery, period of detention in jail, severity of the punishment in the case of conviction and nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witness and prima facie case, but without commenting on merit of case, a case for bail is made out.

¶10Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶11Let the accused-applicant, Deepak Alias Dipoopal, involved in above mentioned case crime number be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each, in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

(ii) 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.

(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A I.P.C./269 B.N.S.

(iv) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C./84 B.N.S.S. 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./209. B.N.S.

(v) The applicant 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 313 Cr.P.C./351 B.N.S.S. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶12In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶13Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. September 26, 2025 SY (Santosh Rai,J.) High Court of Judicature at Allahabad