Allowed

Zahid v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC3 Nov 2022BAIL/33149/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single Judge Court allowed bail to Zahid in a proceedings under NDPS Act. The court noted doubts regarding the prima facie case due to the lack of forensic report confirming the substance as Alprazolam and the absence of a magistrate during personal search.

What did the court decide?

Allowed bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below.

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

¶1

Court No. - 79

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33149 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Zahid Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Diwan Saifullah Khan,Ajun Sahu Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Diwan Saifullah Khan, the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Dinesh Kumar Srivastava, the learned Additional Government Advocate and perused the record.

¶6

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 762 of 2022, under Sections 8/21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Police Station Loni, District Ghaziabad during pendency of the trial in the Court below.

¶7

The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged by a Sub Inspector of Police alleging that on the basis of an information received from a Mukhbir (the informant), the applicant was apprehended and during his personal search pink colour powder packed in a polythene kept in the pant worn by the applicant was recovered. It was alleged that the applicant confessed that the powder was Alprazolam and that he used to consume intoxicating power as also to sell.

¶8

In the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, it has been stated that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case and that he has no criminal history.

¶9

The applicant is languishing in jail since 01.07.2022.

¶10

Per contra, the learned Additional Government Advocate has opposed the prayer for grant of bail.

¶11

Having regard to the aforesaid facts and submissions and keeping in view the fact that although the recovery was made on 30.06.2022, till date except the confessional statement of the applicant, there is nothing on record to indicate that the substance recovered was Alprozolam; although the substance was recovered during personal search of the applicant and the search was not carried out in presence of a Magistrate or a Gazette Officer.

¶12

The aforesaid facts raise doubts against the prosecution case and it gives rise to a reasonable ground for prima facie believing at this stage that the applicant may not be held guilty of the alleged offences.

¶13

Moreover, the applicant has no criminal history and, therefore, there is no ground to believe that in case the applicant is released on bail, he would again indulge in committing similar offences.

¶14

From the aforesaid discussions, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶15

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

¶16

Let the applicant Zahid be released on bail in Case Crime No. 762 of 2022, under Sections 8/21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Police Station Loni, District Ghaziabad 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

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 Jaswant

¶23

Digitally signed by JASWANT KUMAR Date: 2022.11.04 18:17:38 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Zahid v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Zahid 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

Shivpujan Vs State of U.P.

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

Ramesh Maurya Vs State of U.P.

Titu Vs State of U.P.

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

Prashant Sharma Vs State of U.P.