Allahabad High Court
Dujai Pasi 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. - 4687 of 2019
Applicant :- Dujai Pasi
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Lalji Prasad Shukla
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.
Counter affidavit filed by learned AGA is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
The contention of the learned counsel for the applicant is that false recovery of 40 grams of smack has been shown from the possession of the applicant. It is further contended that the mandatory provisions of Section 50 of NDPS Act has not been followed. The applicant has not been apprised of his right to be searched in front of the Magistrate or Gazetted Officer. It is also submitted that the recovered quantity is below commercial quantity. It is stated that the applicant has no criminal history. 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 but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.
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 for the period for which he is in jail and the twin conditions as mentioned in Section 37(1)(b), the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.
Let the applicant Dujai Pasi involved in Case Crime No. 149 of 2019, under Sections 8/21 of NDPS Act, Police Station- Kotwali, District- Sitapur 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 of the Indian Penal Code.
(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. 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/-
