Allowed

Rihan @ Tata v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC5 Apr 2023BAIL/3619/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 3619 of 2023, the Allahabad High Court allowed the bail application of Rihan @ Tata, held falsely implicated over a recovery of charas without a public witness and Section 50 N.D.P.S. Act non-compliance. The court fixed conditions for bail and directed trial conclusion within six months.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail via personal bond with two heavy sureties (one family member). Conditions include presence for trial dates and provisions for Supreme Court 174-A IPC for misuse.

Rihan @ Tata Vs State of U.P. — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 86 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3619 of 2023

¶2

Applicant :- Rihan @ Tata Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- S.M.Ayaz Ali Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶4

Counter affidavit filed by learned AGA is taken on record.

¶5

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

¶6

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive, on the basis of false and planted recovery of 01 kg 500 grams of charas has been recovered from the possession of the applicant and there is no public witness of the alleged recovery. It is further contended that mandatory provision of Section 50 of N.D.P.S Act has not been complied with. At the stage of consideration of bail it cannot be decided whether offer given to the applicant and his consent obtained was voluntary. These are the questions of fact which can be determined only during trial and not at the present stage. In case of prima facie noncompliance of mandatory provision of Section 50 of N.D.P.S. Act, the accused is entitled to be released on bail within the meaning of Section 37 of N.D.P.S. Act. The applicant has properly explained the criminal history in paragraph no. 2 and 3 of the supplementary affidavit. It is also submitted that the applicant is in jail since 31.08.2022 and he undertakes that he will not misuse liberty, if granted.

¶7

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pretrial stage who is involved in supplying contraband, therefore, the applicant does not deserve any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activity. The "reasonable grounds" mentioned in Section 37(1) (b)(ii) of NDPS Act mean something more than prima facie ground. It implies substantial probable causes for believing that accused is not guilty of the offence charged and points to existence of such facts and circumstances which are sufficient to hold that accused is not guilty.

¶8

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in

¶9

view the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of accused and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and the law laid down by the Apex Court in Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. C.B.I. & Another, passed in S.L.P.(Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021 , the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶10

Let the applicant Rihan @ Tata involved in Case Crime No. 504 of 2022, under Section 8/20 of N.D.P.S. Act, Police Station Dakshin, District Firozabad, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two heavy sureties (one should be family member) each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following condition:-

¶11

(i) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code;

¶12

(ii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶13

(iii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶14

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶15

The trial court is directed to expedite the trial of the present case and conclude the same expeditiously preferably within a period of six months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, if there is no legal impediment.

¶16

Order Date :- 5.4.2023 Bhanu

¶17

Digitally signed by :- BHANU PRATAP KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rihan @ Tata v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rihan @ Tata 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

Raju Kashyap Vs State of U.P.

Rinku Vs State of U.P.

Rajkumar Urf Tarjan Vs State of U.P.

Azam Vs State of U.P.

Vinay Pratap Bhodoriya Vs State of U.P.

Reshma @ Nanhi Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others