Dismissed

Usman Ali v. State of U.P.and Another

Allahabad HC11 Aug 2022BAIL/16061/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court rejected a bail application under the N.D.P.S. Act. The court found the applicant to be a habitual offender with multiple violations of past bail conditions and no grounds for reasonable belief of non-guilt, citing recent Supreme Court precedents.

What did the court decide?

Bail application rejected; applicant to remain in custody pending trial.

Usman Ali Vs State of U.P.and Another — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

Reserved On:- 29.07.2022 Delivered On:- 11.08.2022

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16061 of 2022 Applicant :- Usman Ali

¶4

Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Istiyaq Ali, Abhishek Kumar Mishra, Ali Hasan, Chandrakesh Mishra, Rishabh Srivastava

¶5

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A., Ashish Pandey

¶6

Hon'ble Siddharth, J.

¶7

Heard Sri Istiyaq Ali and Sri Rishabh Srivastava, learned counsels for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Ashish Pandey, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2.

¶8

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Usman Ali , with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 745 of 2021, under Sections- 8/21/29/60(3) N.D.P.S Act, Police Station- Baheri, District- Bareilly, pendency of trial.

¶9

There is allegation against the applicant that on the basis of prior information the applicant was caught at 17:45 hours by the police team along with co-accused, Mohd. Yusuf. Recovery of 480 gm smack and Rs. 7,40,000/- was made from the scooty of the applicant. He stated before the police that the amount recovered has been paid by the co-accused, Mohd. Yusuf, who has purchased 700 gm of smack from him. 480 gm of smack was also found in his scooty which he stated was being taken by him for sale to Mustaq and Arif.

¶10

Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. The provision of Section 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act was violated. There is no report of the chemical examination of the alleged

¶11

¶12

material recovered from the applicant. He has criminal history of 17 cases explained in the affidavit. The applicant is in jail since 17.10.2021 and if he is released on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶13

He has relied upon the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Baldev Singh @ Ballu passed in Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal) No. 1359 of 2021 wherein the Apex Court refused to grant regular bail to habitual offender who was found involved in two cases under N.D.P.S. Act.

¶14

Sri Ashish Pandey, learned counsel appearing on behalf of opposite party no. 2, N.C.B has vehemently opposed the bail application and has submitted that the applicant has been found in possession of the cash amount of Rs. 7,40,000/- and 480 gm of heroin which was to be supplied to Mustaq and Arif. The applicant is a habitual offender and has criminal history of 17 cases. Out of 17 cases the applicant was implicated in six cases under N.D.P.S. Act. He does not deserves to be granted any latitude by this Court.

¶15

Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 has further relied upon the recent judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Narcotics Control Bureau vs. Mohit Aggarwal , 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 613 wherein the Apex Court held that narrow parameters of bail provided under Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act requires the court to record reasonable beliefs on the basis of facts and circumstances of the case that the accused is not guilty of the alleged offence. Liberal approach in the matter of bail under N.D.P.S. Act has been depricated by the Apex Court.

¶16

In view of the facts that the applicant repeatedly violated the liberty of bail granted to him in the 17 cases which included six cases under the N.D.P.S. Act, this Court cannot reasonably believe that the applicant has

¶17

¶18

been falsely implicated and deserves to be enlarged on bail.

¶19

After hearing the rival contentions, considering the material on record this Court does not finds any ground for enlarging the applicant on bail at this stage.

¶20

The bail application is accordingly, rejected .

¶21

Order Date :- 11.08.2022 Rohit

¶22

Digitally signed by ROHIT DAS Date: 2022.08.11 16:35:52 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Usman Ali v. State of U.P.and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Usman Ali v. State of U.P.and Another

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

Kashi Mahto Vs State of U.P.

Rahamtullah Alias Daddu Vs State of U.P.

Nawab @ Babloo Vs State of U.P.

Baram Singh and Another Vs State of U.P.

Nandu Gond Vs State of U.P.

Raghuraj Singh Yadav Vs State of U.P.