BA1/970/2021
2021 Latest Caselaw 3210 UK

                Office Notes,
             reports, orders or
SL.           proceedings or
      Date                                     COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No             directions and
             Registrar's order
              with Signatures
                                  BA1 No.970 of 2021
                                  Hon'ble R.C. Khulbe, J.

Mr. Aditya Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the applicant.

Ms. Amit Bhatt, learned DAG with Ms. Shivangi Gangwar, learned B.H. for the State.

Counter affidavit filed by the State is taken on record. Application (IA 1/21) is disposed of.

Accused-Irfan has sought his release on bail in connection with Case Crime/FIR No.498 of 2020, u/s 8/21/60 of the NDPS Act, registered at P.S. Kotwali Mangalore, Tehsil Roorkee, Distt. Haridwar.

It is argued that the accused has been falsely implicated; he is languishing in jail since 10.08.2020; there is no criminal history against him; co-accused Salman has been enlarged on bail; there is no separate consent letter obtained by the police authority from the accused which is mandatory in nature as per Section 50 of the NDPS Act; he is ready to furnish the sureties; and he is entitled for bail as per the law laid down by the Apex Court in "State of Rajasthan v. Parmanand and another" reported in 2014 (5) SCC 345.

Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposed for bail.

In the present matter, the accused is languishing in jail since 10.08.2020 having no criminal history; when the police party was on patrolling duty, the informer informed them about the accused who were carrying the contraband article; on the basis of said information, the police party reached at the spot and apprehended the accused; the accused disclosed that he had smack; accordingly, on the personal search, 300 grams of smack was recovered from his personal search.

Although, at the time of recovery, C.O. Mangalore, who was also a gazetted officer, was present at the spot, in whose presence, the search was conducted; he informed the accused about his legal right but no separate consent letter was obtained by the police party from the accused; it was mandatory in nature as per the Apex Court judgment of State of Parmanand (Supra).

From a perusal of the recovery memo, it is clear that the police party prima facie did not comply with the provision of Section 50 of the Act; accordingly, without commenting any further on the merits of the case, it is a fit case for bail at this stage.

Resultantly, bail application is allowed and the applicant is directed to be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Court concerned.

Pending application, if any, stands disposed of.

(R.C. Khulbe, J.) 21.08.2021 Rdang