Allowed

Aman v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC1 Feb 2023BAIL/1228/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal bail application under the NDPS Act, the court allowed bail despite the charge involving commercial quantities. The release was granted due to doubts about the recovery memo showing only a small sample was tested out of a bulk quantity recovered, combined with the applicant's clean record.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail with a personal bond and two sureties, subject to standard conditions regarding court appearance and not tampering with evidence.

Aman Vs State of U.P. — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 84

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1228 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Aman Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohammad Belal,Mohd. Naushad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Mohammad Belal, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Jhamman Ram, learned AGA for the State-respondent.

¶6

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 1760 of 2022, under Sections 8/21 NDPS Act, Police Station Sahibabad, District Ghaziabad, during pendency of the trial in the court below.

¶7

According to the prosecution case, applicant and one Mohd. Ali were arrested and from their possession 117 gram each Alprazolam Tablets were recovered.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the entire allegations made against the applicant are totally false and baseless and no contraband was recovered from his possession. He further submitted that although recovery was made from the public place but no public witness was taken. He further submitted that merely to show the compliance of Section 50 of NDPS Act, it has been mentioned in the recovery memo that option was given to the applicant that if he wants then his search may be taken either before a Magistrate or a Gazetted Officer but in fact, no such option was given to the applicant. He further submitted that although from the possession of the applicant it is alleged that 900 tablets of Alprazolam were recovered but only 10 tablets were taken for sample and therefore, it cannot be said that remaining 890 tablets were also of Alprazolam. He further submitted that applicant is having no criminal history and he is in jail in the present matter since 4.11.2022, therefore, he may be released on bail.

¶9

Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that from the possession of the applicant 117 gram tablets of Alprazolam were recovered which involved commercial quantity of Alprazolam as according to the notification more than 100 gram is the commercial quantity of Alprazolam. He further submitted that from the recovery memo, it appears that mandatory provisions of Section 50

¶10

NDPS Act have been duly complied with.

¶11

I have heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the record of the case.

¶12

From the perusal of the record, it appears that from the possession of the applicant and co-accused, 117 gram each Alprazolam tablets were recovered which is a commercial quantity as according to the notification, above 100 gram Alprazolam involves commercial quantity but from the perusal of the recovery memo, it appears that from the possession of the applicant 900 tablets of Alprazolam were recovered but only 10 tablets were taken for sample and therefore, it cannot be said that the remaining 890 tablets were also of Alprazolam, therefore, considering this fact and the fact that applicant is having no criminal history and he is in jail since 4.11.2022, this Court is of the view that it is a fit case to release the applicant on bail.

¶13

In the light of discussions made above, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed .

¶14

Let the applicant- Aman be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶15

(i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted.

¶16

(ii) 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 or any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶17

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and antisocial activity.

¶18

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

¶19

Order Date :- 1.2.2023

¶20

Ankita

¶21

Digitally signed by :- ANKITA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Aman v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aman 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

Raju Vs State of U.P.

Subham Dheer Vs State of U.P.

Smt Sheela Vs State of U.P. and Another

Jasim Vs State of U.P.

Bhagirath Verma Vs State of U.P.

Jauhara @ Mahak Vs State of U.P.