Allahabad High Court
Neeraj Singh vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ... on 2 May, 2023
Bench: Karunesh Singh Pawar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 12
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13294 of 2022
Applicant :- Neeraj Singh
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar Srivastava
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.
Heard Sri Avinash Srivastava holding brief of Sri Ashok Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.
The present bail application has been filed by accused-applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No.14 of 2022, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C. and Section 8, 20, 29 of Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, P.S. Dileeppur, District Pratapgarh.
It is alleged in the prosecution case that while the police party was checking the suspected persons. An information was received by them through police informer that one Honda Civic Car No.DL 7C-AF 3180 is coming loaded with illegal ganja and going to Jaunpur. On believing the said information, they stopped the car and apprehended three persons sitting in the car. One person is escaped due to dark night. Among the three persons, the applicant was also alleged to be found sitting in the car. Apart from the other articles 131 Kg. and 590 gms. of ganja is shown to have been recovered from the car.
Learned counsel for applicant submits that nothing has been recovered by the applicant. There is no independent witness in the recovery memo. Applicant has no criminal history. He has been falsely implicated in this case. It is contended that huge quantity of ganja has been recovered from applicant and co-accused persons. It is alleged that as per the recovery memo, it is evident that samples have not been drawn in presence of the magistrate which is mandatory, in support of his contention. He has relied on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bothilal vs. The Intelligence Officer, Narcotics Control Bureau [Criminal Appeal Nos.451 of 2011 and 1185 of 2011] decided on 26.04.2023. He submits that since in that case samples were not drawn in presence of the magistrate therefore, the recovery was found suspicious and accused were acquitted on this ground alone. He submits that in view of this settled position of law, it can be safely said that accused-applicant cannot be convicted in this case. He submits that the applicant is in jail since 25.08.2022. He further submits that the charge-sheet has been filed hurriedly without even waiting for the forensic science laboratory report by the investigating officer.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer however, could not dispute the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bothilal (supra).
On due consideration to the submissions advanced, perusal of the record as also the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 25.08.2022 so also the fact that applicant has no criminal history and prima facie the samples do not appear to have been drawn in presence of the magistrate and considering the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bothilal (supra), it can be safely said that twin conditions under Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act stands satisfied, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.
Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant Neeraj Singh be released on bail in aforesaid case crime number subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:
(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 :- 2.5.2023
Saurabh Yadav/-
