Allowed

Satish Singh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC5 Dec 2023BAIL/33984/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed a bail application under the NDPS Act, holding that the police sampling procedure was illegal and unfair due to mixing contents from eight packets into two bags, making it impossible to trace contraband origin.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:230294

¶2

Court No. - 76

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33984 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Satish Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Praveen Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vikram D. Chauhan,J.

¶6

Learned A.G.A. submits that instructions have been received and has no objection in case the bail application is heard on merits.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶8

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that as per the allegations in the first information report it is alleged that 37 kg 600 gram of Ganja has been recovered from the car in question. The Ganja was found in eight packets, the packets were opened and the material was kept into two bags, one bag contained 20 kg and other bag contained 17 kg 600 grams and from the two bags sample of 50 gram each has been taken. Once eight packets were recovered and was opened by the police and they have been mixed in two bags, then the procedure itself is illegal and the same cannot be determined as to how many packets contains contraband substance. The procedure of sampling is unfair. The applicant has explained criminal history in paragraph 18 of the affidavit. Applicant is languishing in jail since 18.6.2023 and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. for the State opposed the prayer for bail but does not dispute factual matrix of the case. He could not give any explanation as to how the contraband substance in eight packets mixed in two bags.

¶10

Learned AGA has not brought any fact or circumstances to indicate criminal history or antecedents of the applicant which would disentitle the applicant for Bail.

¶11

It is not the case of the State that the applicant has not

¶12

cooperated in the investigation or proceedings before the trial court.

¶13

The principle that Bail is a rule and Jail is an exception has been well recognised by Apex Court more specifically on the touch stone of Article 21 of the Constitution. The said principle has been reiterated by the Apex Court in Satyendra Kumar Antil Vs Central Bureau of Investigation and another, 2022 (10) SCC 51 . Learned AGA has not shown any exceptional circumstances which would warrant denial of bail to the Applicant.

¶14

No material, facts or circumstances has been shown by learned AGA that the accused may tamper with the evidence or witnesses or the accused is of such character that his mere presence at large would intimidate the witnesses or that accused will use his liberty to subvert justice or tamper with the evidence.

¶15

It is settled principle of law that the object of bail is to secure the attendance of the accused at the trial. No material particulars or circumstances suggestive of the applicant fleeing from justice or thwarting the course of justice or creating other troubles in the shape of repeating offences or intimidating witnesses and the like have been shown by learned AGA for the State.

¶16

Learned AGA for the State has not shown any material or circumstances that the accused/applicant is not entitled to bail in larger interests of the public or State.

¶17

11A. In the present case, as per the prosecution eight packets of Ganja is alleged to have been recovered. The packets were opened and were kept in two bags of 20 kg and 17 kg 600 gram each and from the aforesaid two bags 50 gram sample each has been taken and sent for examination. The procedure undertaken by the police authorities is highly unfair as by mixing the recovered substance from eight packets into two bags, it cannot be determined as to how many packets contain the contraband substance. The procedure being adopted for sampling is illegal and not in accordance with law and as such the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶18

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶19

Let the applicant Satish Singh involved in Case Crime No.329 of 2023, under Sections 8/20/29 N.D.P.S. Act, Police Station Handia, District Prayagraj be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:-

¶20

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

¶21

ii. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶22

iii. The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted and/or the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required.

¶23

iv. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶24

v. The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any 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 to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶25

vi. The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court.

¶26

vii. In the event, the applicant changes his residential address, the applicant shall inform the court concerned about new residential address in writing.

¶27

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

¶28

Order Date :- 5.12.2023 Bhaskar

¶29

Digitally signed by :- BHASKAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Satish Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satish Singh 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nasir Khan Vs State of U.P.

Rehan @ Mohammad Ali Vs State of U.P.

Akram Kuraishi Vs State of U.P.

Deepak Urf Deepu Panika Vs State of U.P.

Cheda Alias Elias Vs State of U.P.

Anant Kumar Alias Badshah Vs State of U.P.