Allowed

Rohit Hassa v. Union of India Thru. Intelligence Officer N.C.B. Lko.

Allahabad HC29 Aug 2024/9129/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Hon'ble Court allowed bail application of Rohit Hassa arrested under NDPS Act. Court noted missing procedural compliance regarding sampling under Section 52-A and granted bail since trial was not at final stage and no criminal antecedents existed.

What did the court decide?

Applicant Rohit Hassa released on bail with personal bond and two sureties of Rs.1 lac each, subject to standard conditions.

Rohit Hassa Vs Union of India Thru. Intelligence Officer… — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:58946

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9129 of 2022

¶4

Applicant :- Rohit Hassa Opposite Party :- Union Of India Thru. Intelligence Officer N.C.B. Lko.

¶5

Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- Akhilesh Kumar Awasthi

¶6

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶7

1 . Supplementary affidavit filed today in Court is taken on record.

¶8

2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Akhilesh Kumar Awasthi, learned Counsel for the opposite party and perused the record.

¶9

3 . The applicant seeks enlargement on bail in FIR No.11 of 2022, under Sections 8/18/29 of the NDPS Act, Challaned by Narcotics Control Bureau, District Lucknow.

¶10

4. The submission of the Counsel for the applicant is that the applicant was apprehended with 4.3 kilograms of Afim from the applicant in two bags. The statement of the prosecution witnesses have been recorded, however, the application filed by the applicant for permitting to adduce evidence to the defence witness was rejected by the trial court, against which, a Criminal Revision No.953 of 2024 has been filed, in which, this Court had observed that any orders passed by the trial court would be subject to the decision of the instance revision vide order dated 20.08.2024.

¶11

5 . In the light of the aforesaid, it is argued by the counsel for the applicant that it cannot be said that the trial is at the ending stage. He further argues that in terms of the statement of the prosecution witnesses recorded during trial, none of the witnesses has deposed as to how the sampling was done and on whose presence, which is contrary to the mandate of Section 52-A of the NDPS Act. A reliance has also placed in the case of Yusuf alias Asif vs State; AIR 2023 SC 5041 . He lastly argues that the applicant is in custody since 30.03.2022 and has no criminal history and as such, he may be enlarged on bail.

¶12

6 . Sri Akhilesh Kumar Awasthi, learned Counsel for the

¶13

opposite party opposes the bail prayer by arguing that commercial quantity was recovered from the applicant along with other accused also, as is recorded in the search memo. He further argues that all the prosecution witnesses have been examined and the trial can be concluded by the trial court. He further argues that in the criminal revision, no stay of trial was granted by the revisional court, as such, there is no bar at the conclusion of the trial, as such, the trial can be concluded and thus, the bail application at this stage merits rejection.

¶14

7 . Considering the overall facts, prima facie , the material to suggest the manner of sampling is apparently missing, apart from the same, once the fact witnesses have been record, there is no material to suggest that the applicant if enlarged on bail can in any way adversely effect the trial and the law as explained in the case of Yusuf alias Asif (Supra) and also considering the fact that the prosecution witnesses have not disclosed the manner of sampling coupled with the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and the applicant is in custody since 30.03.2022, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶15

8. Let the applicant Rohit Hassa be released on bail in the aforesaid first information report number on his furnishing personal bonds and two reliable sureties of Rs.1/- lac each out of which one belongs to State of U.P. to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

¶16

(a) The applicant shall execute a bond to undertake to attend the hearings;

¶17

(b) The applicant shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused or suspected of the commission; and

¶18

(c) 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.

¶19

Order Date :- 29.8.2024 akverma

¶20

Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Rohit Hassa v. Union of India Thru. Intelligence Officer N.C.B. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rohit Hassa v. Union of India Thru. Intelligence Officer N.C.B. Lko.

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

Gurudin Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Bhure Alias Rais Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko.

Puttu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.

Prateek Jaiswal Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.

Savitri Devi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Munna Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko