The Allahabad High Court has directed the Superintendent of Police (SSP), Mathura, to appear personally and file an affidavit after CCTV footage produced by 2 accused in an NDPS case led the Court to prima facie find that a "false recovery" had been shown against them.

A bench of Justice Rajiv Lochan Shukla termed the matter "very serious" and directed the SSP to provide a specific para-wise reply to the allegations made by the applicants.

The order was passed while hearing anticipatory bail applications filed by accused Pinku and Naresh Sharma, who apprehended their arrest in an NDPS Act case under Sections 21, 22, and 25.

During the hearing, the counsel for the applicants filed CCTV footage in a pen drive along with a supplementary affidavit. It was submitted that the CCTV footage showed the police taking a black-coloured bag from the applicants' house.

It was then alleged that the same bag was subsequently shown to have been recovered from a Scorpio vehicle, from which 358 grams of Alprazolam and ₹1,95,000 were allegedly recovered.

The applicants' counsel further alleged that money kept in the applicants' house was taken by the police, it was misappropriated and that part of it was subsequently used to falsely implicate them.

It was also alleged that the police had done so to increase the applicants' criminal history.

The order records that applicant Pinku has a previous criminal history of 8 cases, while applicant Naresh Sharma has a criminal history of 3 cases.

The State, on the other hand, opposed the anticipatory bail applications by submitting that a “huge recovery” had been made from accused Javed and that the applicants and another accused had managed to escape.

The State also argued that the applicants might be required for custodial interrogation.

However, after considering the submissions for both parties and perusing the CCTV filed with the application, the High Court observed thus:

"The online newspapers also appear to have reported this incident. Prima facie, in the opinion of the Court, a false recovery has been shown against the applicants".

The Court thereafter observed that this is a very "serious matter" and hence directed that the personal presence and affidavit of the Superintendent of Police, Mathura, be called for.

The SSP has been directed to provide a specific para-wise reply to the statements made in the applicants' affidavit, as well as in the supplementary affidavit filed along with the CCTV footage.

The Court has listed the matter for further hearing on September 1, 2026.

Till then, the Court ordered that in the event of their arrest, the applicants be released on interim anticipatory bail, subject to furnishing personal bonds and sureties.

The Court has also clarified that if any of the conditions are breached, the prosecution would be at liberty to seek cancellation of the interim anticipatory bail.

Advocate Eishan Mehta appeared for the applicant

Case title - Pinku vs State of UP and connected matter

Click Here To Read/Download Order