Allowed

Nasim v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC5 Apr 2022BAIL/6978/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment grants bail to the applicant in an NDPS case. The court found merit in the counsel's submission that mandatory sections of the NDPS Act were violated and the recovery was unreliable, allowing the application despite not opining on the case merits.

What did the court decide?

The applicant is released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions against tampering with evidence and influencing witnesses.

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

¶1

Court No. - 68

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6978 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Nasim Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar Singh Bais 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. 08 of 2022 at Police Station Kotwali Dehat District Saharanpur under Section 8/20 N.D.P.S. Act. The applicant is in jail since 05.01.2022.

¶6

The bail application of the applicant was rejected by learned Special Judge (NDPS Act)/ Additional Sessions Judge, Saharanpur on 17.01.2022.

¶7

Shri Ashok Kumar Singh Bais, learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. 560gm charas was planted on the applicant and two more co-accused to frame him in the instant criminal case to show proficiency of police investigators. Even if the prosecution case is taken on its face value, prohibited substance recovered from the applicant is only 187 gm. The weight of the recovered substance is below 1kg, which is the notified commercial quantity under the N.D.P.S Act. The weight of the recovered substance as stated in the FIR is unreliable as accurate scientific instruments were not used for weighment. No forensic science laboratory report has been submitted which

¶8

confirms that the substance 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. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant does not have any criminal history apart from this case. Lastly it is contended by the learned counsel for applicant that the applicant shall not abscond and will cooperate in the criminal law proceedings. The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence nor influence the witnesses in any manner.

¶9

Shri Amit Kumar, learned brief holder for the State could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. Learned brief holder does not dispute the fact that the applicant does not have any criminal history apart from this case.

¶10

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.

¶11

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

¶12

Let the applicant-Nasim 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:-

¶13

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

¶14

(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness.

¶15

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

¶16

(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.

¶17

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

¶18

Order Date :- 5.4.2022 Nadeem

¶19

Digitally signed by NADEEM AHMAD Date: 2022.04.06 11:38:39 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Nasim v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nasim 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

Pappu Vs State of U.P.

Sanjeev Shakya Vs State of U.P.

Hasmeer Khan @ Bablu Vs State of U.P.

Virendra Vs State of U.P.

Joheb @ Joeb Vs State of U.P.

Golu Varma Vs State of U.P.