Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2021
  6. /
  7. January

Smt Babli vs State Of U P Thru Secretary Home Govt Up Lknw

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|22 December, 2021
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 30
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 47058 of 2021 Applicant :- Smt. Babli Opposite Party :- State Of U.P Thru Secretary Home Govt. Up. Lknw.
Counsel for Applicant :- Avinash Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J.
Heard Sri Avinash Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Vishwanath Vishwakarma, learned brief holder for the State respondent and perused the record.
This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant seeking enlargement on bail, in Case Crime No. 334 of 2021, under Sections 8/21 N.D.P.S. Act, Police Station Kutubsher, District Saharanpur.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the substance (18 grams of smack) recovered from the applicant is below commercial quantity and the police party did not follow the procedure as prescribed for search and seizure of the recovered smack, under the provision of Section 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act. It is contended that the applicant is a vegetable seller and there was dispute between the applicant and some policemen regarding the payment of vegetables and bearing the grudge, the policemen have falsely implicated the applicant. In another case being Case Crime No. 60 of 2020 (Annexure -2), for offences falling under the same sections of the N.D.P.S. Act, the applicant has been enlarged on bail by the court of Special Judge, N.D.P.S. Act/Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. -7, Saharanpur, on 28.05.2020. The applicant is in jail since 23.09.2021.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail, but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.
Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment as well as totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage, without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.
Let the applicant, namely, Smt. Babli, who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.
(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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.
(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or through her counsel. In case of her absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against her under Section 229-A IPC.
(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure her presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C., may be issued and if applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against her, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A IPC.
(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for-
(1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against her in accordance with law.
(v) The Trial Court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his/her independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.
Order Date :- 22.12.2021 Arun K. Singh Digitally signed by BRIJ RAJ SINGH Date: 2021.12.24 11:08:26 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Smt Babli vs State Of U P Thru Secretary Home Govt Up Lknw

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
22 December, 2021
Judges
  • Brij Raj Singh
Advocates
  • Avinash Pandey