Allahabad High Court
Anish @ Chotu @ Anr. vs State Of U.P. on 9 July, 2019
Bench: Karunesh Singh Pawar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 29
Case :- BAIL No. - 6071 of 2019
Applicant :- Anish @ Chotu @ Anr.
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Sheikh Mohammad Ali
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.
Counter affidavit filed by learned AGA and supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
The contention of the learned counsel for the applicants is that the alleged recovery of 1kg 70 grams of charas is false. The alleged contraband has not been recovered from the possession of the accused-applicant. It is further contended that the mandatory provisions of Section 50 of NDPS Act has not been followed as the applicant has not been apprised of his right to be searched in front of magistrate or gazetted officer. It is next submitted that other mandatory provisions of Section 42 of NDPS Act have also not been complied with. The information receipt has not been reproduced in case diary. It is also stated that the alleged contraband is sightly above the commercial quantity. It is lastly submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from judicial custody or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the applicant has a criminal history.
Rebutting the same, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that he has explained the criminal history of the applicant in bail application. He also submitted that the applicant has no criminal history of NDPS cases.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tempering of the witnesses and prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, the applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this case.
Let the applicants Anish @ Chotu and Atiullah involved in Case Crime No. 277 of 2019, under Sections 8/20 of NDPS Act, Police Station- Kotwali Nanpara, District- Bahraich 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 applicants will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
(ii) The applicants will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
(iii) The applicants 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 applicants 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 applicants 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 of the Indian Penal Code.
(vi) In case, the applicants misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. 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 of the Indian Penal Code.
Order Date :- 9.7.2019/Vikram/-
