Allowed

Sameer v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC6 Dec 2022BAIL/49262/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Held a bail application allowed in an NDPS case where the applicant was a passenger in a car where drugs were recovered. Granted bail citing plausible innocence, lack of ownership/driver role, unspecified packet weights in FIR, and irregularities in sample collection.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing personal bond and two sureties to the satisfaction of the lower court subject to conditions.

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

¶1

Court No. - 79

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 49262 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Sameer Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶5

1.Heard Sri Ajay Kumar Srivastava, the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri D.K. Srivastava, 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. 214 of 2022, under Sections 8/20 Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Police Station Gandhinagar, District Baghpat.

¶7

3.The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an FIR lodged by the Station House Officer, alleging that on the basis of an information received from a Mukhbir, a car was intercepted, which was being driven by co-accused and the applicant was sitting in the car. As per the FIR averments 34 packets- 10 large and 24 small were recovered from the car. Although, the FIR mentions weight of one small packet to be 1.008 kg. and the total weight of the packets to be 45.500 kg., the weight of other packets, particularly of any large packet, is not mentioned in the FIR.

¶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, he is having no previous criminal history and he is in jail since 27.09.2022. 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.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.

¶10

6.Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances and keeping in view the fact that although the substance was recovered from the car, the applicant is neither the owner nor

¶11

the driver of the car; that 34 packets are said to have been recovered from the car and weight of each of the packets has not been ascertained or mentioned in the FIR; that there is nothing on record to indicate that samples were drawn from each of the packets in presence of a Magistrate as mandated in law, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient to give rise to a reasonable suspicion against the prosecution case so as to make out a case for enlargement of the applicant on bail.

¶12

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

¶13

8.Let the applicant Sameer be released on bail in Case Crime No. 214 of 2022, under Sections 8/20 Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Police Station Gandhinagar, District Baghpat 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:-

¶14

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

¶15

(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness.

¶16

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

¶17

(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.

¶18

9.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.

¶19

Order Date :- 6.12.2022 Ashish Pd.

¶20

Digitally signed by ASHISH PRASAD Date: 2022.12.09 14:01:49 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sameer v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sameer 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

Ashok Bhuinya Vs Union of India

Satya Prakash Gaur Vs State of U.P.

Charanjeet Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Akhilesh Chauhan Vs State of U.P.

Junaid Vs State of U.P. through Secretary Home

Sabir Vs State of U.P.