Court No. - 18
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 32362 of 2019 Applicant :- Sumit Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Devendra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.
This is an application for bail on behalf of the applicant, Sumit in connection with Case Crime No. 537 of 2019, under Section 8/22 N.D.P.S. Act, P.S. Kotwali Dehat, District Bulandshahar.
Heard Sri Devendra Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Indrajeet Singh Yadav, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State.
The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that he has been falsely implicated in the present crime. The implication of the applicant has come about in terms of a prosecution story that goes like this: that earlier in the day the police tried to apprehend two motorcycle borne criminals about whom there was prior information with the police that they were involved in some occurrence. On the attempt to apprehend them, they are said to have opened fire. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the police did not sustain any injury in consequence of the fire allegedly opened by the two miscreants. However, they were able to overpower and apprehend one of them, while the other escaped. The apprehended man was challaned in Case Crime No. 532 of 2019 under Section 307 I.P.C., P.S. Kotwalil Dehat, District Bulandshahar. This apprehended man disclosed the name of the present applicant as the person who had escaped from the clutches of the police. Lateron, ten hours after this FIR was registered, the applicant was apprehended by the police again on the tip off from an informer. The applicant, on seeing the police before his apprehension, is said to have attempted an escape but was overpowered and revealed that he had narcotic substance in question with him. He was apprehended without associating any public witness of the recovery that is said to have led to recovery of 100 gms. of Alprazolam tablets. The further submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that`the arrest has been made in breach of Section 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act. It is further argued that it is very illogical that an escaped accused, who had a few hours before he was apprehended in the present crime shot at the police would move about the place with some narcotic substance in his pocket. It is submitted that to the contrary, the police have falsely framed the applicant in the first offence on the statement of an accomplice and lateron, planted the narcotic substance on the applicant. The reason to do so is best known to the police. It is emphatically argued by the applicant that he has no criminal history of any kind, including history under the N.D.P.S. Act.
Learned A.G.A. was granted time to seek instructions in the matter vide order dated 20.08.2019. He has sought those instructions and has opposed the bail plea on that basis. However, he does not dispute the fact that the applicant has no criminal history.
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 ten hours before this apprehension in the present crime, the applicant was shown to be a fugitive in another offence relating to engagement with a police party where a case under Section 307 I.P.C. was registered against him on the testimony of an accomplice, the fact that there is no compliance prima facie of Section 50 N.D.P.S. 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 Sumit involved in Case Crime No. 537 of 2019, under Section 8/22 N.D.P.S. Act, P.S. Kotwali Dehat, District Bulandshahar 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.
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 :- 22.8.2019 BKM/-