In an application under Section 8/20 of the NDPS Act, the applicant challenged a lower court order refusing to release him from surety in a bail bond, alleging forgery of his Aadhar card. The High Court upheld the lower court finding that the applicant was not the surety, dismissing the challenge.
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. - 39
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 10015 of 2020
Applicant :- Naresh Saini Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Thakur Prasad Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Sunita Agarwal,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and perused the record.
The applicant herein is aggrieved by the impugned order dated 16.12.2019 passed by the Special Judge NDPS Act/ Additional Sessions Court no.7 in Special Sessions Trial No.333/2017 under Section 8/20 of 'The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 P.S-Kotwali District Moradabad.
By means of the order impugned the application moved by the applicant herein is to release him from surety in the bail bond furnished for grant of bail to the accused Saleem in Special Sessions Trial no.333 of 2017.
Along the said application numbered as 13B, the applicant herein had appended a photocopy of the Adhar card to sumbit that he did not furnish the bail bond for release of accused Saleem. Some unknown person had used his address and a forged Adhar card while furnishing the papers.
Considering the above, the court concerned had examined the matter at its end and got a report from the Station House Officer, Thana Majhola.
In the said report which was brought on record taken as paper no.7B/33, a black and white photo was appended whereas on the application 13B, a coloured photo was pasted and in comparison of both the photographs from naked eye the court opined that the black and white photograph pasted on the papers for bail bond/sureties and the coloured photograph pasted on the application 13B are of one and the same person and, therefore, it could not be doubted that the applicant Naresh Saini is not the surety in the bail bond furnished for release of accused Saleem. The court has also considered that alongwith the papers pertaining to bail bond, copy of Khatauni, the parentage of the applicant has also been appended which had been duly verified by the lekhpal and Tehsildar of the villagein-question.
Having carefully perused the papers pertaining to the bail bond, the paper no. 7B/32 the court below has concluded that there is no merit in the application.
Having noticed the findings of the court below this Court does not find any reason to interfere, that too, on the ground that the Aadhar card of the guarantor appended with the bail bond is a forged document.
In view of the above, the application is found devoid of merit and hence dismissed.
Order Date :- 12.6.2020 Harshita
3 issues framed by the court
Whether there is any merit in the application challenging the order for the release of the applicant from surety in the bail bond furnished for the accused Saleem.
Whether the lower court correctly held that the applicant is not the surety in the bail bond despite allegations of forgery of the Aadhar card.
Whether this Court should interfere with the findings of the lower court on the ground that the guarantor's Aadhar card was a forged document.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Naresh Saini
State of U.P.
Sunita Agarwal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
