Allahabad High Court
Saddam And Another vs State Of U.P. on 23 March, 2021
Bench: Dinesh Pathak
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 90
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11953 of 2021
Applicant :- Saddam And Another
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Kumar Srivastava
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Dinesh Pathak,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicants namely, Saddam and Salman with a prayer to enlarge them on bail in case crime no. 300 of 2020 under Section 8/21/29/60 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act , P.S. Faridpur, District - Bareilly, during the pendency of the trial.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicants have falsely been implicated only on the basis of confessional statement made by co-accused Nazim Khan whereas, in fact, no contraband substance has been recovered from their physical and active possession. In paragraphs 6, 7 & 8 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, it is stated that brother of the present applicants was wanted in a criminal case in Delhi and in his search, the police barged into the house of the present applicants. Feeling aggrieved, mother of the present applicants Smt. Zaheena Begum has moved an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. against the police personnel. In the aforesaid application, report was called for from the concerned police station. Feeling reactionary, the police have lodged as many as seven criminal cases against the applicants and their family members. The details of the cases are mentioned in paragraph 8 of the affidavit. It is further submitted that apart from the seven cases which include the present matter also, two other cases were also lodged against the present applicants. He also submits that the FIR lodged against the present applicants is premeditated just to create pressure on the the present applicants so that they may enter into a compromise in the application, which was filed by the mother of the applicants under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. Further contention is that the statutory provisions of Section 50 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act have not been complied in right manner. He also submits that there is no other criminal history against the present applicants, which has not been objected by learned A.G.A. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that in case the applicants are released on bail they will not misuse the liberty of bail and there is no apprehension of their absconding or hampering the trial in any manner. The applicants are in jail since 24.11.2020.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application and contended that their innocence cannot be adjudicated at pre trail stage, therefore, they do not deserve any indulgence and there is likelihood of their involvement in other case. In case they are released on bail, they may misuse the liberty of bail.
The Apex Court in the Case of Union of India vs. Shiv Shankar Keshari, (2007) 7 SCC 798 has held that the court while considering the application for bail with reference to Section 37 of the Act is not called upon to record a finding of not guilty. It is for the limited purpose essentially confined to the question of releasing the accused on bail that the court is called upon to see if there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is not guilty and records its satisfaction about the existence of such grounds. But the court has not to consider the matter as if it is pronouncing a judgment of acquittal and recording a finding of not guilty.
Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, totality of facts and circumstances of the case as well as the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh vs. State of U.P. and another, (2018) 3 SCC 22, larger mandate of Article 21 of the Constitution of India, without commenting on the merits of the case at this stage, I find it a fit case to release applicant on bail.
Let the applicant no. 1 - Saddam and applicant no. 2 - Salman be released on bail in case crime no. 300 of 2020 under Section 8/21/29/60 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act , P.S. Faridpur, District - Bareilly, on their furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-
(i) The applicants will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.
(ii) The applicants will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.
(iii) The applicants will not indulge in any unlawful activities.
(iv) The applicants will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever.
The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicants to prison.
Order Date :- 23.3.2021
nd
