In a bail application under the NDPS Act, the High Court released the applicant on personal and local sureties subject to specific conditions regarding attendance and abuse of liberty.
Release of the applicant on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 75
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 19376 of 2019
Applicant :- Villa @ Saif Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Balbir Yadav,Achyuta Nand Pandey,Anand Prakash Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Heard Mr. Achyuta Nand Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Ashwani Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the State as well as perused the material on record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant-Villa @ Saif with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 242 of 2019, under Sections 21 and 22 N.D.P.S. Act, Police StationDelhi Gate, District-Aligarh, during the pendency of the trial.
It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that as per the first information report, on 10th April, 2019 on the information received from an informer that the accused of Case Crime No. 235 of 2019 under Sections 147, 148, 452, 354-Gha, 323, 325, 504 and 506 I.P.C. i.e. Villa @ Saif (applicant) was sitting hidden behind the Jyohari Temple situated at Jangalgadhi Byepass, the complainant and other Police Personnels reached and caught the applicant from whose possession 530 grams of intoxicating powder of alprazolam have been recovered. It has further been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is next argued that the alleged recovery is planted one by the Police. There is no independent of public witness from the which it is established that the applicant is involved in the commission of the alleged offence. Compliance of Section 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act has also not been made. It has also been argued that there is no analysis report of the alleged contraband on the basis of which it can be said that the recovered material is contraband. The applicant has criminal history of three cases but the same have satisfactorily been explained in paragraph-15 of the affidavit filed in support of the present bail application. It is next contended that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. The applicant is in jail since 10th April, 2019.
Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but he could not dispute the factual submissions as urged by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Considering the the nature of the offence, material/evidence brought on record, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties as well as the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram
Singh Versus State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 , let the applicant involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to 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.
It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.
(Manju Rani Chauhan, J.)
Order Date :- 16.10.2019
Sushil/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant should be released on bail in a case involving Sections 21 and 22 of the N.D.P.S. Act.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Dataram Singh Versus State of U.P. and anotherReferred¶9
(2018) 3 SCC 22 · Who else cites this
4 provisions across 2 enactments
Villa @ Saif
Manju Rani Chauhan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
Manju Rani Chauhan
Parties & counsel
