Court allowed bail to Jitendra Kumar in an NDPS case involving the recovery of 346.380 kg of ganja, noting mandatory compliance lapses and lack of independent testimony while imposing standard bail conditions.
Released on bail with personal bond and two sureties subject to specific conditions regarding attendance and conduct during trial.
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. - 83
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5164 of 2021
Applicant :- Jitendra Kumar @ Jeetu Kashyap Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shrikrishna Shukla,Alka Upadhyay,Manish Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the 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. 492 of 2020, under Sections 8/20(b) (ii) of NDPS Act at Police Station Jawan, District Aligarh.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that false recovery of 346.380 kg Ganja is shown to have been made from the joint possession of the accused applicant and co-accused Rishi Kumar. He has further submitted that at the time of arrest, mandatory provisions of NDPS Act has not been complied with. There is no independent eye witness of the alleged recovery, which has been shown by the police. There is no criminal history against the accusedapplicant. He has further submitted that in case the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. The applicant is in jail since 29.09.2020.
It is next submitted that similary placed co-accused Rishi Kumar has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 04.10.2021 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 22997 of 2021, therefore, applicant is also entitled to be released on bail on the ground of parity.
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- Jitendra Kumar @ Jeetu Kashyap, 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 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.
Order Date :- 3.12.2021 PS
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the case warrants bail considering the alleged false implication and recovery of narcotic.
Whether an independent eye witness exists for the alleged recovery of ganja.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Jitendra Kumar @ Jeetu Kashyap
Shekhar Kumar Yadav
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
