Allowed

Taslim @ Timma v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC7 Sept 2021BAIL/29289/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court allowed a bail application under the NDPS Act. While noting allegations of procedural violation of Section 50 regarding the search, the bench, without expressing an opinion on merits, held the applicant as a fit case for bail with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Release of Taslim alias Timma on bail on personal bond and two sureties subject to specific conditions regarding court attendance and conduct.

Taslim @ Timma Vs State of U.P. — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 68

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 29289 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Taslim @ Timma Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mukesh Joshi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.

¶5

Pursuant to the direction of this Court dated 24.08.2021, affidavit of compliance has been filed by the learned A.G.A. regarding explanation as to why the S.H.O. concerned has wrongly mentioned the quantity of contraband article, i.e., 2.74 gram of Charas in the recovery memo, which is said to have been recovered from the possession of the applicant.

¶6

The concerned Sub-Inspectors Chandveer Singh and Jagjeet Singh, P.S. Mugalpura, District Moradabad are present.

¶7

The explanation is sufficient.

¶8

The personal appearance of Sub-Inspectors Chandveer Singh and Jagjeet Singh is, hereby, exempted.

¶9

Heard Shri Rahul Saxena, Advocate holding brief of Shri Mukesh Joshi, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record of the case.

¶10

An exemption application has been filed on behalf of the applicant along with present application for exempting the filing of certified copy of the F.I.R. as it could not be made available to the applicant due to COVID-19.

¶11

The exemption application is allowed.

¶12

The filing of certified copy of the F.I.R. is hereby exempted.

¶13

The present bail application has been filed on behalf of applicant, Taslim alias Timma with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 102 of 2021, under Section 8/20 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Police Station- Mugalpura, District- Moradabad, during pendency of trial.

¶14

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the

¶15

present case due to village Panchayat Election. No incriminating article/contraband i.e. 274 gm. Charas has been recovered from the personal possession of the applicant. The police has shown recovery of 274 gm. Charas from the right pocket of capri of the applicant, which is below commercial quantity. The police party had not followed the mandatory provisions of Sections 50 of the NDPS Act. It is further submitted that in order to make search and recovery of the contraband articles from the body of the applicant, search and recovery has to be inconformity with the requirements of Section 50, NDPS Act. A search and recovery made from the applicant of the alleged contraband does not satisfy the mandatory requirements of Section 50, NDPS Act as held by Constitution Bench of Apex Court in the case of Vijaysinh Chandubha Jadeja Vs. State of Gujarat, (2011) 1 SCC 609 .

¶16

It is further submitted that the applicant has criminal history of four other cases related to illegal possession of country made arm, Gambling Act and Excise Act, which have been explained in the supplementary affidavit. In three cases the applicant has been released on bail by the court below. It is next submitted that there is also no possibility of the applicant either fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. The applicant, who is languishing in jail since 7.6.2021, undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty, if granted. It has also been pointed out that in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial.

¶17

Per contra learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail. In case the applicant is released on bail, he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.

¶18

Upon considering the totality of facts and circumstances of the case and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for bail.

¶19

Let applicant, Taslim alias Timma be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions-

¶20

(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.

¶21

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on

¶22

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.

¶23

(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.

¶24

(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.

¶25

It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order.

¶26

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶27

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the petitioner alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said person (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number to which the said Aadhar Card is linked.

¶28

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.

¶29

Order Date :- 7.9.2021 T. Sinha

Taslim @ Timma v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Taslim @ Timma 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

Ajay Singh Vs State of U.P.

Ankit Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Beni Prasad Kewat Vs State of U.P.

Manoj @ Manu Vs State of U.P.

Arjun Balmiki Vs State of U.P.

Sunil Kumar Jaiswal @ Kanhaiya Vs State of U.P.