Allowed

Jubair v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC15 Jul 2022BAIL/21185/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application for a case involving possession of narcotics under N.D.P.S. Act, the High Court granted bail due to discrepancies in FIR recovery version and lack of independent witnesses, imposing strict conditions regarding tampering, presence, and consequences of non-appearance.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail on personal bond and two local sureties subject to conditions regarding cooperation, presence, and non-tampering.

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

¶1

Court No. - 78

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 21185 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Jubair Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shujauddin Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ali Zamin,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.0167 of 2022, under Section 21/22 N.D.P.S. Act, P.S. Syohara, District Bijnor.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that as per F.I.R. version on 11.04.2021 from the possession of the applicant from the right hand in two boxes each having 10 rapers and per rapper 60 tablets and another hand eight rapers and per raper 20 tablets, total 500 tablets and both boxes 11 tablets were recovered. He further submits that as description in the F.I.R. total 660 tablets were recovered, 143 gram of 100 tablets weight was found. There is no independent witness of the alleged recovery. He has been falsely implicated in the present case. There is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and, in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. It is next contended that the applicant is languishing in jail since 11.04.2022.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the bail prayer of the applicant and submits that as per F.I.R. version 1100 tablets have been recovered from the possession of the applicant and as per F.S.L. report alprazolam powder has been recovered, therefore, the applicant is not entitled for bail.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, as per description in the F.I.R. version total 660 tablets have been recovered but recovery of 1100 tablets being shown and no independent witness of the recovery, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, the applicant is entitled for bail, let the applicant- Jubair involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court

¶10

concerned, subject to the following conditions :-

¶11

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he will not tamper with the evidence and will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and will cooperate with the trial. The applicant 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.

¶12

(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.

¶13

(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.

¶14

(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.

¶15

Order Date :- 15.7.2022 Jitendra

¶16

Digitally signed by JITENDRA KUMAR PATEL Date: 2022.07.16 16:58:16 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Jubair v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jubair 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Saleem Vs State of U.P.

Talib Vs State of U. P. thr. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. of U. P. at Luck

Shivam Jaiswal Vs State of U.P.

Subhan Vs State of U.P through Secretary Home

Dinesh Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Shweta Jhaveri Vs State of U.P.