Allowed

Subhan @ Shahbaz v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC27 Apr 2022BAIL/4591/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court allowed a bail application in an NDPS case where investigators allegedly violated mandatory procedures for recovery. Observing potential procedural violations, the court granted bail subject to conditions prohibiting tampering with evidence and influencing witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on personal bond and two sureties with conditions to not tamper with evidence, influence witnesses, or breach trial court orders.

Subhan @ Shahbaz Vs State of U.P. — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 68

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4591 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Subhan @ Shahbaz Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Abhishek Singh,Yadu Nath Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶5

By means of this bail application, the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 333 of 2021 at Police Station Sasnigate District Aligarh under Sections 21/22 NDPS Act. The applicant is in jail since 20.08.2021.

¶6

The bail application of the applicant was rejected by learned Special Judge (NDPS Act)/ Additional Sessions Judge, Aligarh on 10.09.2021.

¶7

Shri Yadu Nath Singh, learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. 650 gm. Diazepam was planted on the person of the applicant to frame him in the instant criminal case to show proficiency of police investigators. The weight of the recovered substance as stated in the F.I.R. is unreliable as accurate scientific instruments were not used for weighment. The weight of the recovered substance is infact much less than 500 gm. which is the notified commercial quantity under the NDPS Act. No forensic science laboratory report has been submitted which confirms that the substance

¶8

allegedly recovered is prohibited under the NDPS Act. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. The mandatory provisions of Section 42 and Section 50 of the NDPS Act have been violated.

¶9

Explaining the criminal history of the applicant, learned counsel for the applicant contends that being from economically weaker section of the society the applicant has become a convenient scapegoat for the police authorities who have repeatedly implicated the applicant in false cases in quick succession to burnish their professional credentials. The applicant has never misused the liberty of bail granted to him in the said cases. The criminal cases do not depict commission of any heinous crime by the applicant and have no bearing on the instant case. The applicant is not a flight risk and there is no possibility of his influencing witnesses, tampering with the evidence or reoffending.

¶10

Shri Paritosh Kumar Malviya, learned AGA for the State could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. Learned AGA does not contest the criminal history of the applicant as disclosed in the bail application.

¶11

I see merit in the submissions of learned counsel for the applicant and accordingly hold that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶12

In the light of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the

¶13

bail application is allowed.

¶14

Let the applicant- Subhan @ Shahbaz be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below. The following conditions be imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶15

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

¶16

(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness.

¶17

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

¶18

(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.

¶19

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

¶20

Order Date :- 27.4.2022

¶21

Dhananjai

¶22

Digitally signed by DHANANJAI Date: 2022.04.28 15:08:30 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Subhan @ Shahbaz v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Subhan @ Shahbaz 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

Prathvipal Vs State of U.P.

Anil Maurya Vs State of U.P.

Virendra Kumar Gond Vs State of U.P.

Nitin Chauhan Vs State of U.P.

Junaid Ali Vs State of U.P.

Meenu Sain Vs State of U.P.