Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicant contended that initially a complaint was lodged under section 8/18 of NDPS Act in which the applicant has been enlarged on bail vide order dated 13.2.2019 passed in Bail Application No.463 of 2019. It is further contended that after the applicant was enlarged on bail a complaint under Sections 23, 29 of NDPS Act has been added by the Prescribed Authority against the applicant. It is further submitted that no offence under aforesaid section is made out just to harass the applicant, these two sections have been added so that she may remain in jail inspite of the bail granted. It is next contended that the recovered quantity is 2 gms above the commercial quantity. It is also contended that mandatory provisions of Sections 42, 50 and 57 of NDPS Act have not been complied with. The applicant is languishing in jail since 3.5.2017.
Ms. Shikha Sinha, learned counsel as well as learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the applicant is a Nepali citizen therefore, there is every likelihood that she may abscond as such the applicant may be directed to file two heavy sureties before the CJM concerned.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and for the period for which he is in jail, and also considering twin condition as mentioned in Section 37 (1) (b) of NDPS Act, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.
Let the applicant Sunita Poon involved in N.C.B. Case No.08 of 2017, under Sections 23/29 of NDPS Act, Police Station-N.C.B. District- Lucknow be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond and two heavy local sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(I). The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
(ii). The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
(iii). 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 her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
(iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she 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.
(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through her counsel. In case of her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against her under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(vi) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure her 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 her, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
Order Date :- 30.7.2019 P.s.