Allowed

Ram Babu v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC19 Jan 2023BAIL/58337/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 58337 of 2022, the Allahabad High Court granted bail to Ram Babu in Sections 08/20 N.D.P.S. Act case despite arguments regarding lack of F.S.L. report and statutory compliance. The applicant was ordered to furnish a bond and sureties subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

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

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

¶1

Court No. - 78

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 58337 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Ram Babu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Manoj Gautam Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

¶5

Learned counsel for the applicant has filed supplementary affidavit today, which is taken on record.

¶6

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

¶7

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant Ram Babu with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.223 of 2022, under Sections 08/20 N.D.P.S. Act, Police Station Muskara, District Hamirpur during pendency of the trial.

¶8

It is alleged in the F.I.R. that 1 kilogram and 200 gram Ganza has been recovered from the possession of the applicant.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that alleged recovery was planted upon the applicant by the police as there is no independent witness regarding alleged recovery and till today there is no F.S.L. report, which shows that recovered contraband substance is Ganza. Further contention is that the statutory provisions of Sections 50 and 52 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 have not been complied with in the right manner. It has also been assured on behalf of the applicant that the applicant is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. Criminal history of the applicant has clearly been explained in para no. 3 of the supplementary affidavit and in para no. 9 of the bail application. It has also been submitted that the applicant is in jail since 23.10.2022 and in case, he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and co-operate in trial.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant.

¶11

The Apex Court in the Case of Union of India vs. Shiv Shankar Keshari, (2007) 7 SCC 798 has held that the court while considering the application for bail with reference to

¶12

Section 37 of the Act is not called upon to record a finding of not guilty. It is for the limited purpose essentially confined to the question of releasing the accused on bail that the court is called upon to see if there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is not guilty and records its satisfaction about the existence of such grounds. But the court has not to consider the matter as if it is pronouncing a judgment of acquittal and recording a finding of not guilty.

¶13

Considering the facts of the case and keeping in mind, the ratio of the Apex Court's judgment in the case of Union of India (supra), larger mandate of Article 21 of the constitution of India, the nature of accusations, the nature of evidence in support thereof, the severity of punishment which conviction will entail, the character of the accused-applicant, circumstances which are peculiar to the accused, reasonable possibility of securing the presence of the accused at the trial, reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered with, the larger interest of the public/ State and other circumstances, but without expressing any opinion on the merits, I am of the view that it is a fit case for grant of bail.

¶14

Let the applicant, Ram Babu, 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 following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶15

The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶16

The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶17

The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶18

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶19

Order Date :- 19.1.2023 Vibha Singh

¶20

Digitally signed by :- VIBHA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ram Babu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Babu 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

Ramvir Vs State of U.P.

Suraj Bharadwaj Vs State of U.P.

Deepak Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P.

Sharafat Vs State of U.P.

Rajkumar Singh Vs State of U.P.

Farhat Janha@ Farhaj Janha Vs State of U.P.