Bail application under NDPS Act Sections 8, 21, 29, 60 after alleged recovery from a car not owned by the applicant. Counsel argued no personal recovery and non-compliance with Section 50; parity sought with co-accused Karan Mehta. Court granted bail without commenting on merits.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:30263
Court No. - 14
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3460 of 2024
Applicant :- Deepak Kumar Gupta Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru.Prin.Secy. Home Counsel for Applicant :- Mohammad Azam Siddiqui,Anam Ansari
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J .
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State-respondent who has filed a counter affidavit which is taken on record.
The instant application has been moved seeking bail in respect of Case Crime No. 78 of 2024, under Sections 8,21,29,60 of the N.D.P.S. Act, 1985, Police Station Gomti Nagar, District Lucknow, during trial.
The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case. No recovery of any contraband was made from the applicant nor he is the owner of the alleged car wherefrom the alleged contraband items were confiscated. It is further urged that perusal of the FIR would reveal that the mandatory provision of Section 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act has not been complied with at the time of the alleged recovery. Moreover, the gazetted officer is alleged to be present at the time of recovery, but his signatures are not available. Thus, no alleged offence is made out against the applicant.
It is urged that the applicant has deep roots in the society. He has no previous criminal history and has been in jail since 16.2.2024. Thus, in these circumstances, the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail.
It is also urged that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released on bail or tampering with the witnesses. In case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is seeking parity with the co-accused namely Karan Mehta who has been granted bail by this Court by means of the
order dated 12.04.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 3964 of 2024. Copy of the said order is provided for perusal which is taken on record. Moreover, considering the rival submissions as well as the facts and circumstances of the case also noticing that no recovery has been made from the present applicant as was the case of the other co-accused Karan Mehta of whose parity has been sought.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail, but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.
Considering the rival submissions as well as the facts and circumstances of the case and the material available on record also considering the nature of allegations and accusation against the applicant, the severity of the punishment if convicted and the period of incarceration as well as the fact that no apprehension has been expressed by the learned AGA that the applicant is at the risk of fleeing justice or that he would tamper with evidence or influence any witness, hence, at this stage, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Accordingly, the instant bail application is allowed .
Let the applicant- Deepak Kumar Gupta involved in the abovementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned. At the time of executing required sureties, the following conditions shall be imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.
(ii) 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.
(iii) 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.
(iv) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial 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.
(v) 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, absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
O rder Date :- 16.4.2024 Asheesh
Digitally signed by :- ASHEESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant should be granted bail in an NDPS case where no contraband was recovered from him and Section 50 compliance is questioned.
Whether parity with a co-accused already granted bail justifies release of the applicant.
6 provisions across 4 enactments
Deepak Kumar Gupta
State Of U.P. Thru.Prin.Secy. Home
Jaspreet Singh
As recorded by the court registry
3 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
