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

Bharatraj Saini vs State Of U.P.

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|22 February, 2021

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State and perused the record of the case.
The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 1795 of 2020, under Section 8/21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Police Station-Kavinagar, District-Ghaziabad during the pendency of trial.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that as per the prosecution case 600 tablets of Alprazolam containing 0.5 mg. each have been recovered from the possession of the applicant. The main substratum of argument of learned counsel for the applicant is that total weight of the aforesaid recovered Alprazolam tablets is 30 gms. which is below commercial quantity, therefore, provisions of Section 37 of N.D.P.S. Act are not attracted in this case. It is next submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the aforesaid recovery is not supported by any independent public witness, therefore, possibility of false implication of the applicant cannot be ruled out. It is also submitted that mandatory provisions of Section 50 of N.D.P.S. have not been complied with in true spirit of the law. The applicant has criminal history of seven other cases which has been disclosed in para 17 of the bail application, but none of the case is related to N.D.P.S. Act. The applicant is languishing in jail since 27.12.2020 and in case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage therefore, the applicant does not deserve any indulgence. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will misuse the liberty of bail.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a fit case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed.
Let the applicant Bharatraj Saini, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) 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.
(ii) 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.
(iii) 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.
(iv) 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 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 him in accordance with law.
(v) The applicant shall file computer generated copy of this order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
(vi) The computer generated copy of this order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.
(vii) The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order.
Order Date :- 22.2.2021 Sunil Kr. Gupta
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

Bharatraj Saini vs State Of U.P.

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
22 February, 2021
Judges
  • Sanjay Kumar Singh