The High Court granted anticipatory bail to Saurabh in a case involving possession of Alprazolam under the N.D.P.S. Act. The court found it a fit case due to severity of charges and complicity, imposing strict conditions on the release.
Bail granted subject to furnishing personal bond and two sureties and adhering to specified trial-related conditions.
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. - 69 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 20771 of 2021 Applicant :- Saurabh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mukesh Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.
Rejoinder affidavit has been filed today, is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the material available on record.
This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No.149 of 2021, under Section 21/22 N.D.P.S. Act, Police Station Mau Darwaja, District Farrukhabad.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. From the possession of the applicant, 220 gram Alprazolam has been recovered. The alleged recovery that has been shown is false and fabricated. There is no public witness of the alleged recovery. He further submits that at the time of arrest, mandatory provisions of Section 50 of N.D.P.S. Act has not been complied with. He further submits that similarly placed co-accused Shivji has already been granted bail by another co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 16.08.2021 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.21022 of 2021, copy whereof has been annexed as Annexure No.1 to the rejoinder affidavit. He further submits that since the co-accused has already been granted bail, the applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. The applicant is in jail since 22.03.2021.
On the other hand, learned A.G.A. opposes the application for bail.
Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment as well as totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.
Let the applicant- Saurabh , who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further,
before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.
(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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 IPC.
(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., may be issued and if 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 IPC.
(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) 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.
(v) The Trial Court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial within a period of one year after the release of the applicant.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Order Date :- 6.9.2021
Ajeet
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is a fit case for bail in a narcotics case involving possession of Alprazolam.
Whether non-compliance with Section 50 of N.D.P.S. Act warrants bail.
Whether entitlement of bail is available to the applicant on grounds of parity with another co-accused.
7 provisions across 3 enactments
Saurabh
State of U.P.
Shekhar Kumar Yadav
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
Shekhar Kumar Yadav
Parties & counsel
