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

Rahul vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|11 May, 2021
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 74
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16747 of 2021 Applicant :- Rahul Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Raj Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J.
This is an application for bail on behalf of the applicant, Rahul, in connection with Case Crime No. 145 of 2021, under Section 8/21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short "NDPS Act"), Police Station - Loni, District - Ghaziabad.
Heard learned Counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. appearing for the State through Video Conferencing.
The submission of the learned Counsel for the applicant is that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present crime. It is asserted that recovery of 120 grams of noxious powder has been shown from the possession of the applicant, which is claimed to be Alprazolam. It is submitted that the substance's weight has been shown along with a heavy poly bag, which has accounted much more than 20 grams, taking it beyond the commercial quantity of 100 grams. It is urged that whatever has been recovered, does not exceed the commercial quantity prescribed for Alprazolam under the NDPS Act, if measured without the poly bag. It is also argued that recovery has been shown from a busy public place, at 1:35 p.m., with no public or independent witness of the recovery associated. The recovery has been effected in breach of Sections 42 and 50 of the NDPS Act, as the substance has not been produced and searched before any Gazetted Officer. It is particularly argued that the inference that whatever was recovered from the applicant was Alprazolam is based on pure conjecture, as there is no scientific material on record or any forensic science laboratory report to show that the substance recovered is indeed Alprazolam powder. It is in particular argued that the applicant is a respectable man with no criminal history. He is in jail since 07.02.2021.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail. In these very hard times of CoViD-19 pandemic, notice of this application was served on the State on 25.03.2021, but no written objection has been filed.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of allegations, the gravity of the offence, the severity of punishment, the evidence appearing in the case, in particular, the fact that prima facie the substance recovered has not yet been tested and found to be Alprazolam by the forensic science laboratory, the fact that prima facie the weight of the heavy poly bag carrying the substance has also been included in the weight of the recovered substance, which is marginally in excess of the commercial quantity (with the poly bag included), the fact that there is prima facie non-compliance of Sections 42 and 50 of the NDPS Act, the fact that the applicant has no criminal history, but without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court, finds it to be a fit case for bail.
The bail application, accordingly, stands allowed.
Let the applicant - Rahul involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on executing his personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:
(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
(ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses.
(iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the Trial Court.
(iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission.
(v) 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 such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
(vi) The party shall file a computer generated copy of this order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, which shall be self-attested by the counsel of the party concerned.
(vii) The Court/Authority/Official concerned shall verify the authenticity of the computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the complainant would be free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this Court.
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. It is further clarified that 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 :- 11.5.2021 I. Batabyal
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

Rahul vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
11 May, 2021
Judges
  • J
Advocates
  • Ram Raj Pandey