Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Ms. Shikha Sinha, learned counsel for the respondent as well as perused the record.
Counter affidavit filed by Ms. Shikha Sinha, learned counsel for the NCB is taken on record.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is a driver. Co-accused, Mohd. Iqbal who was also the driver has been enlarged on bail by the coordinate Bench of this court vide order dated 28.2.2020 passed in Bail No.10585 of 2019.
Learned counsel for the applicant claims parity.
As per the prosecution story, 1160.20 kg of poppy straw has been recovered from the truck. It is a raw material for manufacturing the narcotic substances. He submits that the applicant was not knowing the substance which was being loaded along with onions in the truck. The applicant has no criminal history. The applicant is in jail since 25.3.2019.
Ms. Shikha Sinha, learned counsel for the NCB opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant. She submits that the recovery of alleged contraband is of commercial quantity and the applicant is not liable to be enlarged on bail.
Having regard to all the facts and circumstances and keeping in view the nature of offence, evidence in support of accusation, complicity of the accused, arguments, arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, as also considering the twin condition as mentioned in Section 37(1)(b) of NDPS Act having been satisfied, in as much as there is no likelihood of the accused applicant of committing similar offence in future; there is no previous criminal history, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.
Let the applicant, Mohd. Rashid involved in NCB Crime No.13 of 2019, under Sections 8/15/27/29 NDPS Act, Police Station NCB, District Lucknow, be released on bail on his 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 will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
(iii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
(iv) 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.
(v) 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.
(vi) 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.
Order Date :- 17.2.2021 Madhu