Court No. - 62
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 43246 of 2018 Applicant :- Sahdev Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Sonu Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed by the learned A.G.A. is taken on record.
Heard Sri Sonu Kumar Tiwari learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A. appearing for the State.
It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that 464.4 Kg. contraband article, i.e., Ganja is said to have been recovered from the possession of the applicant. It is further submitted that nothing has been recovered from the possession of the applicant and a false recovery of tractor has been shown from the possession of the applicant, which is planted. The applicant has no concern with the alleged recovery. He further submits that there is no compliance of mandatory provisions of Section 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act, hence the recovery is bad in the eyes of law. The applicant has no criminal history with respect to the N.D.P.S. Act. It has also been submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 27.04.2018. He further submits that the co-accused Sheikh Mushtak Ali has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 6.12.2018 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.30081/2018. The applicant has no other reported criminal antecedent.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.
Considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tempering of the witnesses and prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge and reformative theory of punishment, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case let the applicant Sahdev involved in Case Crime No. 105 of 2018, under Sections 8/ 20 N.D.P.S. Act, Police Station Babina, District Jhansi be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, with the following conditions:-
(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.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.
Order Date :- 19.12.2018 saqlain