Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate and perused the record.
The accused-applicant is involved in F.I.R. No.330 of 2021, under Section 8/21 of NDPS Act, P.S. Kotwali Bikapur, District Ayodhya.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is innocent and has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR. The applicant has completed LLB and has been falsely implicated in this case. It is submitted that the instant FIR was registered on the basis of an alleged recovery of 25 grams Smack, which is below the commercial quantity.
Learned counsel has submitted that at the time of recovery, mandatory provisions of the Act and Rules have not been complied with by the police party. He has further submitted that the police party have seized the alleged contraband article in breach of mandatory provisions of the Act.
It is submitted that the applicant does not have any previous criminal history. He is languishing in jail since 13.07.2021. There is no apprehension of the applicant influencing the witness, tampering the evidence or fleeing from judicial process. In case he is released on bail, he undertakes to abide by all the conditions and not to misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned Additional Government Advocate has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that all the mandatory provisions have been complied with at the time of recovery. However, he has not contradicted the fact that the recovered contraband article is below the commercial quantity.
Taking into consideration the fact that the contraband article recovered from the applicant is below commercial quantity as well as the facts that the applicant does not have any previous criminal history, charge sheet has been filed and that no apprehension of applicant influencing the witness, tampering the evidence or fleeing from judicial process has been shown by learned Additional Government Advocate during the course of argument, however, without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it a fit case for grant of bail. Thus, the instant bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant Abhishek Kumar Upadhyaya be released on bail in aforesaid first information report number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties required by the Court below concerned with the following conditions:
1. The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and 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.
2. 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.
3. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail 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.
4. 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. If in the opinion of the trial court default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 27.8.2021 nishant/-