Allahabad High Court
Jitendra Rajpoot vs State Of U.P. on 18 July, 2016
Bench: Abhai Kumar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 28
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2210 of 2016
Appellant :- Jitendra Rajpoot
Respondent :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Appellant :- Satya Prakash Chaturvedi
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Abhai Kumar, J.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A for the State and considered the submissions of regarding bail.
This is the bail application on behalf of applicant-appellant against the judgment of conviction dated 04.04.2016 passed by Additional District & Sessions Judge-III, Jalaun at Orai, passed in Special Session Trial No. 30 of 2013 - State Vs. Jitendra Rajpoot in Case Crime No. 963 of 2012, under Section 18/12 of N.D.P.S Act, Police Station ? Dakore, District Jalaun, whereby the appellant was convicted under Section 21 of N.D.P.S Act, and was ordered to undergo punishment of five year's rigorous imprisonment as well as Rs.10,000/- as fine.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that only 10 grams heroin have been recovered from the possession of the applicant-appellant, whereas the commercial quantity is 250 grams. It is also submitted that maximum punishment awarded under Section 21 of N.D.P.S Act is five years only. It is further submitted that appellant was on bail during the trial. It is further submitted that learned trial court did not consider and appraisal of evidence was not proper. The recovered material was sent belated for chemical examination No independent evidences have been examined and compliance of Sections 42, 50 & 57 of the N.D.P.S have not been done, whereas learned A.G.A for the State opposed the bail.
It is next contended that the applicant is in jail since 04.04.2016 and in case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.
Considered the submission made by learned counsel for the appellant-applicant and seeing the facts that recovered contraband is only ten grams much below the commercial quantity and only five years punishment have been awarded and seeing the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and also perusing the material brought on record, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, it is a fit case for grant of bail. The fine will be deposited within one month from release after custody.
Let the applicant ? Jitendra Rajpoot involved in S.T No. 30 of 2013 arising out of Case Crime No. 963 of 2012, State Vs. Jitendra Rajpoot, under Section 18/12 of N.D.P.S. Act, Police Station ? Dakore, District ? Jalaun, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions: -
1. The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
2. The applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.
3. The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial Court.
In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the order granting bail shall automatically stand cancelled.
The fine will be deposited within one month from release after custody.
Order Date :- 18.07.2016.
Vinod.
