Allowed

Deepak v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC31 Oct 2023BAIL/43562/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed a bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. It held that the recovery of narcotics was tainted by non-compliance with Section 50 and Chapter V of the NDPS Act, including lack of independent witness and improper sampling, warranting grant of bail.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions of appearance and non-interference.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:208090

¶2

Court No. - 74

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 43562 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Deepak Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Kartikey Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶6

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

¶7

Heard counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State-opposite party.

¶8

The instant bail application, under Section 439 Cr.P.C., has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 636 of 2023, under Sections 21/22 N.D.P.S. Act, Police Station- Kosikalan, District- Mathura during the pendency of trial.

¶9

Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. False recovery of 120 grams alprazolam powder has been shown from the applicant. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. The mandatory provisions of section 50 of N.D.P.S. Act have not been complied with. There is no F.S.L. report to establish that the substance recovered is 'alprazolam'. While weighing the recovered substance, the police has weighed it along with packing material. The police has deliberately shown the quantity of the alleged narcotics substance marginally higher in order to add gravity to the offence. No accurate scientific instruments were used for weighment. The applicant is in jail since 08.09.2023, having no criminal history. In case, he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶11

Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record this Court prima facie finds that the mandate of Chapter V of the N.D.P.S. Act has not been followed. The sampling has not been done in the presence of Magistrate, which is required under Section 52A of the NDPS Act. There is no independent witness to the recovery. Further, the applicant has no criminal antecedents

¶12

and has remained confined for more than a month and after submission of the charge-sheet there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, more so when no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or delay the trial or intimidate the witness, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶13

Let the applicant Deepak, involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the conditions that he:

¶14

(i) shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court;

¶15

(ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

¶16

(iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.

¶17

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

¶18

Order Date :- 31.10.2023 Sachin Mishra

¶19

Digitally signed by :- SACHIN MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Deepak v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deepak 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

Nikki @ Bagga Vs State of U.P.

Sunita Devi Vs State of U.P.

Salman Vs State of U.P.

Chanchal Mishra Alias Ratnesh Vs State of U.P.

Shivendra Singh Vs State of U.P.

Devendra Tiwari @ Rajan Tiwari Vs State of U.P.