Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned A.G.A. on the point of admission of criminal appeal and perused the judgment and order dated 11.01.2010.
This appeal has been filed by the accused appellants against the judgment and order dated 11.01.2010 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, F.T.C No.32, Barabanki in Sessions Trial No. 400 of 2008 (Crime No. 23 of 2008): State Vs Gyan Chandra and another, under Sections 8/21 N.D.P.S.Act, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Barabanki, whereby learned Additional Sessions Judge has held the accused guilty under Section 8/21 N.D.P.S. Act, consequently he has convicted and sentenced each of the accused to undergo rigorous imprisonment for four months and to pay fine of Rs.1000/- each under Section 8/21 N.D.P.S. Act. The learned Additional Sessions Judge has further directed that in case accused appellants fail to deposit the amount of fine, they will further undergo additional rigorous imprisonment for one month under the aforesaid Section.
Admit.
Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned A.G.A on the prayer for bail of the accused appellants.
The submission of learned counsel for the appellants is that accused appellant No.1 Harish Chandra Singh is said to have been found in possession of 12 grams Smack and accused appellant No.2 Gyan Chandra is said to have been found in possession of 11 grams Smack. On chemical analysis, the actual quantity of Smack was found to be 27.6% and 26.8% respectively. In this way, the actual quantity of Smack alleged to have been recovered from the possession of accused was less than 5 grams which was small quantity within the meaning of NDPS Act. The offence is bailable. The trial court has awarded four months sentence to each of the accused appellant. The accused appellants were on bail during trial but they did not misuse the liberty of bail. Therefore, they deserve to be released on bail.
Learned A.G.A opposed the prayer for bail.
Considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned Additional Government Advocate. The accused appellants were on bail during trial, but they did not misuse the liberty of bail. Keeping in the recovered quantity of Smack and the sentence awarded by the trial court to the accused appellants, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the appeal, appellants may be released on bail.
Let accused-appellants Harish Chandra Singh and Gyan Chandra be released on bail in aforesaid Sessions Trial number during pendency of the appeal on their furnishing personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.
However, the realization of fine is not stayed and the same be deposited by the appellants, if not already deposited, within one month from the date of their release, failing which this order of bail shall stand cancelled.
19.01.2010 Renu/-