Allowed

Titu v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC3 Nov 2022BAIL/24425/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single judge order granted bail to the applicant in a trial under the NDPS Act. The court allowed the application based on the procedural irregularity regarding the recovery of samples without a Magistrate's presence or independent witnesses, without adjudicating the merit of the charges.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail by furnishing personal bond and two sureties in each like amount.

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

¶1

Court No. - 79

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 24425 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Titu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Jatan Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶5

1.Heard Sri Ram Jatan Yadav, the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Jitendra Kumar Jaiswal, the learned Additional Government Advocate and perused the record.

¶6

2.The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 245 of 2022, under Sections 21/22, Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Police Station Banna Devi, District Aligarh.

¶7

3.The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of a first information report lodged by a Sub-Inspector of Police alleging that on an information received from a Mukhbir, the applicant was apprehended and white coloured powder kept in a bag was recovered and on the basis of his personal experience, the SubInspector assumed that it was intoxicating powder.

¶8

4.It has been averred in the affidavit filed in support of the bail application that the applicant is an innocent person, he has been falsely implicated in the case and he is in jail since 10.04.2022. It has also been stated in the affidavit that there is no possibility of the applicant tampering with any evidence and in such circumstances, the applicant is entitled for bail. It is also stated in the affidavit that the applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail and he will fully cooperate in the investigation.

¶9

5.A counter affidavit has been filed annexing therewith a copy of the test report of the substance, which affirms that the substance recovered was Diazepam. The quantity of powder recovered was 510 gram.

¶10

6.A rejoinder affidavit has been filed on behalf of the applicant explaining the applicant's involvement in three more cases - (i) Case Crime No. 235 of 2022, under Section 429 IPC and (ii) Case Crime No. 482 of 2021 under Section 21/22 arcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, in both of which the applicant has been released on bail. In third case bearing Case Crime No. 443 of 2021 under Section 429 IPC, the applicant has yet to file

¶11

an application for release on bail.

¶12

7.A perusal of the averments made in the FIR indicates that the search of the applicant was not carried out in presence of any Magistrate or gazetted officer and there are no independent witnesses of the alleged recovery.

¶13

8.Per contra, the learned Additional Government Advocate has opposed the prayer for grant of bail, but he could not dispute the aforesaid aspects of the matter.

¶14

9.Having considered the aforesaid facts and submissions and keeping in view the fact, prima facie it appears at this stage that the procedure prescribed for collection of samples has not been followed in the present case, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in the aforesaid case.

¶15

10.In light of the preceding discussion and without making any observation on the merit of the case, the instant bail application is allowed .

¶16

11.Let the applicant Titu be released on bail in Case Crime No. 38 of 2022, under Sections 8/20/60, Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Police Station Sahajnawa, District Gorakhpur on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below, subject to the following conditions:-

¶17

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶18

(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness.

¶19

(iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶20

(iv) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶21

12.In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move an application before this Court seeking cancellation of the bail.

¶22

Order Date :- 3.11.2022 Ashish Pd.

¶23

Digitally signed by ASHISH PRASAD Date: 2022.11.05 14:25:29 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Titu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Titu 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

Shivpujan Vs State of U.P.

Mohd. Asad @ Asjad Vs State of U.P.and 3 Others

Ramesh Maurya Vs State of U.P.

Gyan Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Zahid Vs State of U.P.

Prashant Sharma Vs State of U.P.