Amarjeet vs State Of U.P.
2023 Latest Caselaw 19158 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:148860
 
Court No. - 74
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 21778 of 2023
 

 
Applicant :- Amarjeet
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Pramod Kumar Maurya
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State-opposite party and perused the record.

2. The instant bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 71 of 2023, under Sections 8/22/23 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, Police Station Thuthibari, District Maharajganj during the pendency of trial.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. False recovery of 280 ampules of 2 ml. each of Buprenorphine Injections Talgesic and 200 ampules of 2 ml. each of Diazepam Injections has been shown from the applicant. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. The mandatory provisions of N.D.P.S. Act have not been complied with. There is no FSL report to establish that the substance recovered is intoxicating. The recovered contraband is below the commercial quantity. In this regard, reliance has been placed upon a judgment of the Kerala High Court in Binu v. Union of India (Kerala), 2011(2)KHC 817. It is next contended that co-accused Mukesh Kumar has been granted bail by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 21720 of 2023, Mukesh Kumar v. State of U.P., vide order dated 13.07.2023. The applicant claims parity. Prior to the instant case the applicant was involved in Case Crime No. 392 of 2018, under Sections 323, 504 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali, District Maharajganj. In the said case the applicant has been granted bail. The applicant is in jail since 04.04.2023 and in case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

5. Having regard to the submissions made above and the fact that the applicant has remained confined for almost three and half months and after submission of the charge-sheet there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, more so when no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or delay the trial or intimidate the witness, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

6. Let the applicant- Amarjeet, involved in the aforesaid case, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned subject to the conditions that he:

(i) shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court;

(ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; and,

(iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.

7. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

Order Date :- 26.7.2023

SKT/-