Allahabad High Court
Pintu Dangi vs State Of U.P. And Another on 17 March, 2023
Bench: Siddharth
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Reserved On:- 14.03.2023
Delivered On:- 17.03.2023
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 50187 of 2022
Applicant :- Pintu Dangi
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Azizur Rahman Khan,Saddam Husain
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ashish Pandey
Hon'ble Siddharth, J.
1. Heard Azizur Rahman Khan, counsel for applicant; Sri Ashish Pandey, counsel for NCB and learned AGA for State.
2. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Pintu Dangi, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 09 of 2020, under Sections- 8/18/29/27-A N.D.P.S. Act, Police Station- N.C.B. Lucknow, District- Lucknow pendency of trial.
3. There is allegation in the complaint lodged that opium weighing 9 kg was recovered from three co-accused, namely, Sarita Devi, Ruby and Abhay Kumar. In their confessional statement recorded under Section 67 of the N.D.P.S. Act. They stated that they seized opium was procured from the applicant and on the basis of the same the applicant has been implicated in this case.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that except the confessional statement of co-accused against the applicant there is no other material against him to implicate him in the present case. He was never aware of the implication in the present case and he was arrested after issuing of non-bailable warrant issued on the orders of this Court. He was never aware of the present proceedings against him and therefore he could never appear before N.C.B. He has no concern with this case and has been falsely implicated in this case. Supplementary affidavit has been filed against him after about two years.
5. Counsel for the N.C.B has vehemently opposed the bail application. He has submitted that the applicant absconded from the proceedings and only after he was arrested, supplementary complaint was filed against him. Mere non-possession of any contraband cannot absolve his liability. He has submitted that as per the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of N.C.B vs. Mohit Aggarwal, 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 613 mere non recovery of any contraband from the possession of applicant cannot be a ground from grant of bail to the accused. He has also relied upon the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Union of India (NCB) ETC. vs. Khalil Uddin ETC, 2022 Live Law (SC) 878, wherein the Apex Court held that where the accused is unnamed in the statement of co-accused recorded under Section 67 of the N.D.P.S. Act and large quantity of contraband is recovered bail cannot be granted to such accused.
6. He has further placed before this Court the bail rejection order of co-accused, Seeta, Ruby and Sarita.
7. Learned A.G.A has opposed the bail application of the applicant.
8. After hearing the rival contentions, this Court finds that the applicant has managed to evade the proceedings for a long time and as per the judgment of the Apex Court cited above, he cannot be granted bail only because nothing has recovered from him.
9. Counsel for the N.C.B has placed before this Court criminal history of 7 cases of the applicant which disentitles him to grant of bail by this Court at this stage .
10. The bail application is accordingly, rejected.
11. Trial court is directed to conclude the trial of the applicant as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of one year from the date of production of certified copy of this order.
Order Date :- 17.03.2023
Rohit
