Ajmal v. State of U.P.

Court No. - 75

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 26678 of 2019

Applicant :- Ajmal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ramesh Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Krishna Pratap Singh,J.

Heard Mr. Ramesh Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant, Ms. Seems Shukla, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the material placed on record.

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case with some ulterior motive. It is further contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that 560 gms of charas is alleged to have been recovered from the possession of the applicant, which is false, fabricated and planted. In fact no such recovery was effected from the possession of the applicant. It is next contended that the alleged recovered substance is less than the commercial quantity. There is no independent witness of the alleged recovery. Learned counsel for the applicant further contended that mandatory provisions of NDPS Act has not been complied with in the present case. It is next contended that there is no chance of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the prosecution evidence. It is next contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has no previous criminal history and the applicant is in jail since 15.06.2019 and in case he is enlarged 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 the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage therefore, the applicant does not deserve any indulgence. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will misuse the liberty of bail.