Allowed

Raju Teli v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC23 May 2022BAIL/10229/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Allahabad accepted a bail application by Raju Teli, a co-accused in an NDPS case where recovery was alleged against him. Granting bail due to procedural lapses in recovery and independent witnesses, the Court imposed strict conditions regarding court appearances.

What did the court decide?

Released on personal bonds and two sureties subject to six conditions ensuring court attendance and prohibiting specific procedural defaults.

Raju Teli Vs State of U.P. — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 78

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10229 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Raju Teli Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Shoeb Khan,Brij Kishor Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit filed in the Court today is taken on record.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the accused-applicant and learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

¶7

Present bail application has been filed by the accused-applicant involved in Case Crime No. 430 of 2021, under Sections 8/21 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (in short "N.D.P.S. Act") at Police Station-Kotwali, District-Basti.

¶8

Learned Counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant was apprehended on 04.12.2021 and on single arrest, roped in four cases i.e. Case Crime Nos. 425 of 2021, 426 of 2021, 427 of 2021 and 379 of 2021 and in the cases aforesaid, the applicant has already been enlarged on bail vide order(s) dated 16.12.2021, 01.02.2021, 19.01.2022 and 01.02.2022 by the Court concerned. However, in the instant case the bail application of the applicant was rejected by the Court concerned vide order dated 02.02.2022. As per story of the prosecution, the recovery of 1,200 tablets of Alprazolam, which are of 0.25 Mg., available in the open market, has been shown from the possession of the applicant. The weight of the alleged recovered tablets of Alprazolam, as per story of the prosecution, would come to 150 Mg., which is much below the commercial quantity prescribed in the schedule of the Act, 1985. There is no public independent witness to support the story of he prosecution. FSL report is not available with the prosecution till date.

¶9

It is further submitted that co-accused Chandru Teli from whose possession recovery of 1.100 Kg. of Charas has been shown by the prosecution has already been released on bail by this Court vide order dated 17.05.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 10934 of 2022. The accused applicant is in jail since 04.12.2021 and the possibility of conclusion of trial in near future is very bleak.

¶10

It is also stated that mandatory provisions related to search, seizure and arrest have not been complied with.

¶11

It is lastly submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from judicial custody or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty, terms and conditions of bail and will cooperate in the trial.

¶12

Learned A.G.A., on the basis of instructions, has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the factual submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant particularly that the co-accused has already been released on bail.

¶13

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the record and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties including in relation to non-compliance of mandatory provisions related to the recovery, search and seizure, independent witnesses and FSL report as also that co-accused has already been released on bail and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I am of the view that a case for bail is made out.

¶14

Let the applicant- Raju Teli be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing personal bonds and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to following conditions :-

¶15

(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.

¶16

(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 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶17

(iii) In case, the applicant misuse 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 fail 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.

¶18

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the

¶19

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.

¶20

(v) The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.

¶21

(vi) The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.

¶22

(vii) 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.

¶23

Order Date :- 23.5.2022 Vinay/-

¶24

Digitally signed by VINAY KUMAR Date: 2022.05.23 18:02:11 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Raju Teli v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raju Teli 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mishareyar Khan Vs State of U.P. through Secretary Home at Lucknow

Maqsood Ansari Vs State of U.P.

Shamim Vs State of U.P.

Vishal Thakur @ Vishal Singh Vs State of U.P.

Rahish Vs State of U.P.

Nitin Kumar Vs State of U.P.