Allowed

Mubssir v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC20 Feb 2019BAIL/4197/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 4197 of 2019, the High Court released Mubssir on bail in a drug conspiracy case under Sections 8/20 of NDPS Act. The court found a reasonable apprehension of witness tampering and prima facie satisfaction of the charge, relying on Article 21 and Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. bail was granted with specific compliance conditions.

What did the court decide?

Release of the applicant on bail on a personal bond with two sureties upon furnishing an undertaking to comply with trial dates and appear before the court.

Mubssir Vs State of U.P. — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 69

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4197 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Mubssir Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajendra Kumar Misra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard Sri R.K.Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Abhinav Prasad, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State.

¶6

It has been contended 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 and he has committed no offence. It is next contended that 400 gm. contraband article i.e. "Charas" alongwith Rs.1050/-cash is said to have been recovered from the possession of the applicant.In fact, nothing has been recovered from his possession.There is no independent or public witness of the alleged recovery.He further submits that there is no compliance of mandatory provisions of Section 50 of N.D.P.S. Act, hence the recovery is bad in the eyes of law. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. It has also been submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 16.12.2018.The applicant has no other reported criminal antecedent. Co-accused Israil has already been released on bail by this Court on 13.2.2019 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.4299 of 2019.

¶7

Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.

¶8

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, and also considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶9

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case let the applicant Mubssir involved in Case Crime No.267 of 2018, under Sections 8/20 of N.D.P.S. Act, 1985, Police Station Fatehpur, District Saharanpur be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶10

(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

¶11

the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶12

(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.

¶13

(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.

¶14

(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.

¶15

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.

¶16

Order Date :- 20.2.2019 IA

Mubssir v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mubssir v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Farman Vs State of U.P.

Umar Vs State of U.P.

Yogendra Tiwari Vs State of U.P.

Ikrar Vs State of U.P.

Farid Vs State of U.P.

Munna Saroj Vs State of U.P.