Rashid @ Bantu Vs State of U.P.

Court No. - 68

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9505 of 2022

Applicant :- Rashid @ Bantu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Arun Kumar Vishvakarma 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. 49 of 2022 at Police Station Etmadaula District Agra under Sections 8/22 NDPS Act. The applicant is in jail since 23.01.2022.

¶6

The bail application of the applicant was rejected by learned Special Judge (NDPS Act), Court No.9/ Additional Sessions Judge, Agra, on 04.02.2022.

¶7

Sri Arun Kumar Vishvakarma, learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. 570 Grams 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 grams which is the notified commercial quantity under the NDPS Act. No

¶8

forensic science laboratory report has been submitted which 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.

¶9

Explaining the criminal history of the applicant, learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant belongs to an economically weaker section of the society and has become an easy scapegoat for the police authorities who have falsely implicated him in a number of cases to burnish their 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 bail application is allowed.

¶13

Let the applicant- Rashid @ Bantu 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:-

¶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

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the

¶19

prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶20

Order Date :- 25.4.2022 Deepika

¶21

Digitally signed by DHANANJAI Date: 2022.04.29 16:16:20 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rashid @ Bantu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rashid @ Bantu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sachin@ Khatola Vs State of U.P.

Chandan Bharati Vs State of U.P.

Sanavvar Vs State of U.P.

Rai Anoop Prasad Vs State of U.P.

Nazir Hussain Vs State of U.P.

Videshi Ram Vs State of U.P.