Allahabad High Court
Dharmau Yadav vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home ... on 7 January, 2025
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:1090
Court No. - 15
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 121 of 2025
Applicant :- Dharmau Yadav
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. Of U.P. Lko.
Counsel for Applicant :- Sandhya Devi
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.
Heard Sandhya Devi, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.
Instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 382 of 2023, under Section 8/21 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, P.S.-Sandeela, District-Hardoi.
As per prosecution version, the contraband substance, i.e. 100 grams of 'Alprazolam', is said to be recovered from the possession of the applicant.
Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been planted by the police in the instant matter. She added that 100 grams of 'Alprazolam' is said to be recovered from the possession of the applicant, which is below the commercial quantity and there is no public eye witness of the alleged recovery. She submits that there is non-compliance of Section 50 of N.D.P.S. Act.
In support of her contentions, she has placed reliance upon the Judgment of the Apex Court rendered in the case of Arif Khan @ Agha Khan vs. State of Uttarakhand, (2018) 18 SCC 380 wherein it has been held that mandatory procedure of Section 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act has to be complied with in regard to search and recovery. She further added that there is one case criminal history of the applicant, which has been explained in paragraph no. 19 of the bail application and the applicant is cooperating in the investigation proceedings and the chargesheet has been filed and as such, there is no possibility that the applicant would tamper the evidences or would threaten the witnesses.She next submits that the applicant is languishing in jail since 03-09-2023 and he undertakes that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of bail and submits that applicant was involved in committing the aforesaid offence as contraband substance i.e. 'Alprazolam', has been recovered from his possession and, as such, he is not entitled to be released on bail.
Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of record, it is evident that recovered contraband substance, i.e. 100 grams of 'Alprazolam', which is below than the commercial quantity; there is no independent public eye witness of the alleged recovery; one case criminal history of the applicant has been explained and the applicant is languishing in jail since 03.09.2023 coupled with the fact that he has undertaken that if he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.
Considering the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.
Let the applicant,Dharmau Yadav involved in the aforementioned crime 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:-
(1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial;
(2) 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. He 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;
(3) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.; and
(4) 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, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.
It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case.
Order Date :- 7.1.2025
AKS
