Court No. - 55
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 23927 of 2016 Applicant :- Om Prakash Gupta Opposite Party :- U.O.I Thru Central Narcotics Bureau Counsel for Applicant :- Gulab Chandra,Vinod Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- Sanjay Kumar Singh
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sanjay Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the complainant and learned A.G.A. appearing for the State.
This is the second bail application of the applicant. On 4.4.2016, this Court had passed the following order in Criminal Misc. Bail Application no. 7243 of 2015 :-
"Supplementary counter affidavit filed by Sri Sanjay Kumar Singh learned counsel for the opposite party today in Court, is being taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Sanjay Kumar Singh learned counsel for the opposite party.
Present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to enlarge the applicant-Om Prakash Gupta on bail during the pendency of trial in case crime No. Nil of 2014 under Sections 8/20 N.D.P.S. Act, police station C.B.N. Ghazipur, district Ghazipur.
Learned counsel for the applicant contends that as per prosecution version, 11.800 Kg Ganja packed in a suitcase, 20.500 Kg. Ganja and 1.300 Kg. Charas has been recovered from another suitcase and there is no compliance of Section 50 of N.D.P.S. Act and further there contradiction inasmuch as in one place it has been stated by the prosecution that the information was given by the police informer and in the second place it has been stated that the information was received from relevant source, therefore, there is contradiction with regard to information received by the prosecution.
Sri Sanjay Kumar Singh learned counsel for the opposite party states that the contraband was recovered from exclusive possession and that sufficient compliance of Section 50 of N.D.P.S. Act has been made and the procedural anomalies which are raised by the learned counsel for the applicant can be raised at the time of trial and not at the time of grant of bail and he has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.
After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and after perusing the bail rejection order as well as the averments as contained in the present application, this Court is of the opinion that the learned counsel for the applicant could not point out any good ground for enlarging the applicant on bail.
Accordingly, the prayer for enlarging the applicant on bail in the aforesaid case is hereby refused.
Bail application is rejected.
After the order was passed, learned counsel for the applicant prayed that the trial of the aforesaid case may be expedited.
Accordingly, court below concerned is directed to consider and conclude the trial of aforesaid case most expeditiously, strictly in accordance with law, after hearing the parties and without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either the parties, provided the proceedings are not stayed by any Court of law."
Learned counsel for the applicant has brought to the notice of this Court, proceedings of trial which seems to be still at a very primary stage.
Learned A.G.A. as well as Sri Sanjay Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the complainant have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.
Having heard the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 and considering the period of detention, this Court is of the view that the applicant should be enlarged on bail.
Let the applicant Om Prakash Gupta be released on bail in Case Crime No. Nil of 2014, under Section 8/20 of N.D.P.S. Act, P.S. C.B.N., Ghazipur, district-Ghazipur on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-
(i) The applicant will co-operate with the trail and remain present personally on each and every date fixed after release.
(ii) The applicant will not tamper with the prosecution evidence and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever. (iii) The applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities. (iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever.
The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.
However, trial court is directed to expedite the trial of the present case and conclude the same expeditiously preferably within a period of six month from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, if there is no legal impediment.
Order Date :- 20.9.2018 Faridul