Allowed

Mohammad Israr v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC12 Oct 2022/11291/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail to Mohammad Israr in an NDPS case involving possession of charas slightly above commercial quantity. The court emphasized lack of public witnesses and non-compliance of Section 50 of the Act, while imposing strict conditions to ensure trial attendance and prevent evidence tampering.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail with personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions ensuring attendance at trial milestones and prohibition of witness intimidation.

Mohammad Israr Vs State of U.P. — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 15

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11291 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Mohammad Israr Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Dhananjai Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Arvind Kumar Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release the applicant on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 271 of 2021, under Section 8/20 N.D.P.S. Act, P.S.- Huzurpur, District - Bahraich.

¶7

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. As per allegation 1.217 gram contraband substance i.e., charas has been shown from the possession of the applicant which is above than commercial quantity and there is no independent public witness of the alleged incident. He further submits that there is non compliance of Section 50 of N.D.P.S. Act. Learned counsel has relied upon the case of Arif Khan @ Agha Khan vs. State of Uttarakhand reported in (2018) 18 SCC 380 in which Apex Court has held that Section 50 of the NDPS Act mandatorily requirement with regard to search and seizure. It is specifically mentioned in paragraph 39 that applicant has no criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 09.09.2021. In case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer of bail and submits that there is a recovery of 1.217 gram of contraband substance i.e., charas has been shown from the possession of the applicant which is above than commercial quantity and he is involved in committing the aforesaid offence and not entitled for any relief.

¶9

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of record, I find that 1.217 gram of contraband substance i.e., charas has been shown from the possession of the applicant which is slightly above than commercial quantity and there is no public witness of the alleged incident; the

¶10

applicant has no previous criminal history; coupled with the fact that he is languishing in jail since 09.09.2021, thus without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.

¶11

Let the applicant- Mohammad Israr involved in the aforementioned 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, with the following conditions:-

¶12

(1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial;

¶13

(2) 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. He 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;

¶14

(3) 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.; and

¶15

(4) 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, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶17

It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case.

¶18

Order Date :- 12.10.2022 Ujjawal

¶19

Digitally signed by UJJAWAL PARJAPATI Date: 2022.10.12 17:50:57 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Mohammad Israr v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammad Israr 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

Rajneesh Kumar Vs State of U.P.Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home.Lko

Virendra Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Kamla Maghar Vs Union of India Thru. Intelligence Officer Ncb Lucknow and Anr.

Ramesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. through Secretary Home Department Lucknow

Nand Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy.Home Civil Secrt.Lko

Pradeep Kumar @ Dakiya Vs State of U.P. Thru, Prin, Secy. Home, Lko