Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2018
  6. /
  7. January

Ram Pravesh Chauhan vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|31 May, 2018
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 24
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 43512 of 2017 Applicant :- Ram Pravesh Chauhan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Om Prakash-VII,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that co- accused has been granted bail by this Court on 8.9.2017 vide Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 32813 of 2017. He further submits that since the role of the applicant is not distinguishable with the role of co-accused, the applicant is also entitled for bail. Applicant is in jail since 31.10.2016 and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.
On the other hand, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail.
I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties.
Vide order dated 8.9.2017 in criminal misc. bail application no. 32813 of 2017, another Bench of this Court passed the following order:
"Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.
Applicant- Tej Kumar Mishra @ Sonu Mishra seeks bail in Case Crime No. 452 of 2016, under Section 8/20 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Police Station Sarai Inayat, District Allahabad during the pendency of trial.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the first information report was lodged against Ram Pravesh Chauhan who is the driver of the truck. The applicant who is the cleaner. Braj Mohan Gupta who is the owner of the truck on which the incriminating articles loaded and Ajay Singh to whom the incriminating contraband was to be supplied have been roped in the present case by lodging the first information report by S.I. Keshav Chandra Rai and it is alleged that 8 quintals and 30 kg. of Ganja was kept in the cavity of the truck. The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant who is merely a cleaner has nothing to do with the alleged contraband and at the most the driver and owner of the vehicle and the person to whom the said contraband is to be delivered are responsible. The applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. No incriminating article has been recovered from the possession of the applicant. There is utter violation of mandatory provision of the Act for search and seizure. There is no independent witness to support the prosecution version. The applicant is not a previous convict. The applicant is languishing in jail since 30.10.2016 having no criminal history to his credit deserves to be released on bail. In case, the applicant is released on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by contending that huge quantity of contraband Ganja cannot be implanted to falsely implicate the accused persons who are named in the first information report along with the applicant and was in the knowledge of the applicant that Ganja is being carried in the said vehicle. The recovered Ganja has also been sent for chemical analysis, which was found to be Ganja and as such the applicant does not deserve to be enlarged on bail. In case the applicant is released on bail he will misuse the liberty of bail and try to intimidate the prosecution witnesses.
Having considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant, the case of the applicant is distinguishable from the case of the other accused persons, let the applicant Tej Kumar Mishra @ Sonu Mishra involved in the aforesaid crime 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 that :-
1. The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.
2. The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.
3. The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted."
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that the identically placed co-accused has already been released on bail by this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that it is a fit case for bail. The bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant Ram Pravesh Chauhan involved in Case Crime No. 452 of 2016 under Sections 8/20 N.D.P.S. Act, Police Station Sarai-inayat, District - Allahabad be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.
1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
2. The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
3. The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
4. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.
5. 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.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions,the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.
Order Date :- 31.5.2018 safi
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

Ram Pravesh Chauhan vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
31 May, 2018
Judges
  • Om Prakash Vii
Advocates
  • Ajay Kumar Mishra