Supplementary counter affidavit filed today is taken on record.
This is the second bail application. The first bail application was rejected as not pressed by co-ordinate Bench of this Court. The matter has been released from there vide order dated 25.05.2018.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No.357/2016, under Section 8/18 NDPS Act, Police Station - Safdarganj, District - Barabanki.
The applicant is the owner of Truck No.RJ19GE 2917. It is stated that when the police party was on routine search on 06.11.2016 at the highway, the said truck was apprehended with 24 Quintal and 50 Kg Poppy husk, which was bagged in 70 bags. It is stated in the F.I.R. that the police party had received an information through one Akil Ahmad that 5-6 miscreants had broken door of the godown of the said Akil Ahmad, wherein Poppy husk was stored and they had looted the said Poppy husk from the godown and by loading the same on the said truck fled away. When the said truck was chased from Barabanki the same entered into the boundary of Lucknow District and the same was apprehended near Bani turn but the miscreants fled away taking the benefit of darkness. When the said truck was chased, the looted poppy husk was recovered.
Initially this F.I.R. was lodged under Section 395 I.P.C. in Police Station Safdarganj, Barabanki, but later on after recovery of said narcotic substance, the present F.I.R. was lodged.
It is stated by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is the owner of the said truck and is a resident of Jodhpur (Rajasthan) and his truck was loaded with Makrana Marble on 4.11.2016 and the said marble was unloaded at Faizabad and after unloading the said material, the truck was returning back on 8.11.2016 from Faizabad, and when the driver and the conductor of the said truck were taking food at Dhaba, the police personnel apprehended them and demanded some money as the truck belongs to Rajasthan and when they refused to same, this false case has been lodged. Learned counsel for the applicant has filed goods receipt issued from Amardeep Freight Carrier through supplementary affidavit, which shows that the said truck was loaded from Makrana Marble, Kishangardh, Rajasthan and was to be unloaded at Makrana Marble, Wazirganj, Faizabad.
Learned A.G.A. was directed to verify the R.R. Today, through supplementary counter affidavit the said G.R. (Goods Receipt) has been verified and the supplementary affidavit to this effect has been filed. It is evident that the applicant is owner of the said truck and at the relevant time he was not present at the truck. There was no arrested on spot. In this case, the driver and the cleaner of the said truck has not been made accused. Accused is a reputed transporter and does not appears to be guilty of the offence and it appears that in case he is released on bail he will not repeat the same offence again.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the record and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail.
Let applicant (Nemi Chandra) be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional 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.
Order Date :- 30.8.2019 S. Kumar