Allowed

Khalid Bilal v. Union of India Thru. Central Bureau of Narcotics Lko and

Allahabad HC10 Jun 2024BAIL/6226/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal bail application, the Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench granted bail to a wholesale drug dealer accused of possessing seized Alprazolam tablets. The court noted the case relied on unproven suspicions regarding invoice-less supply. Ignoring the risk of misuse and highlighting lack of prima facie evidence for guilty intent, the court discharged the applicant on personal bonds and

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on furnishing personal bonds and two reliable sureties of Rs. 20,000/- each, with conditions to attend hearings, avoid similar offences, and not tamper with evidence.

Khalid Bilal vs Union of India Thru. Central Bureau of… — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:46295

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6226 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Khalid Bilal Opposite Party :- Union Of India Thru. Central Bureau Of Narcotics Lko And Counsel for Applicant :- Farooq Ayoob Counsel for Opposite Party :- S M Singh Royekwar

¶5

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶6

1 . Rejoinder affidavit filed today by the counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri S.M. Singh Royekwar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Central Bureau of Narcotics (C.B.N.) as well as learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

¶8

3 . In terms of the seizure memo, it was alleged that on the basis of a search carried out, a packet containing 60,000 tablets of various brands which had Alprazolam as the essential ingredient were recovered.

¶9

4 . The counsel for the applicant argues that the applicant is a wholesale dealer and carries out a business in drug and cosmetics in pursuance of the license which is contained in annexure no. 3, which is also valid till 2028. He further argues that the even as per the recovery memo, it was alleged that on being asked by the courier company, it was informed to them that the said goods were to be supplied further after the invoice was received. An assumption was drawn that the said goods are being supplied without any invoice and in case, the agency has not apprehended the goods, they might have been supplied further. It is further argued by the counsel for the applicant that the entire case is based upon the suspicion expressed that the goods were meant to be supplied without issuance of proper invoice. There is no denial of the fact that the applicant has a wholesale license to deal with the drugs.

¶10

5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the C.B.N. opposed the bail prayer by arguing that there was all likelihood of the tablets being misused for illegal purposes and the applicant would not succeed in his intent to carry out the sending of the goods without any invoice. He further argues that the preparation to commit an offence is also an offence as prescribed under Section 30 of the NDPS Act.

¶11

6. Considering the fact that the entire search is carried out based upon the suspicion that the goods were to be supplied without any invoice and the there being noting more than that, prima facie, a case for bail is made out, the applicant who is in custody since 20.04.2024, is enlarged on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶12

7. Let the applicant Khalid Bilal be released on bail in FIR/ Case Crime No. 02 of 2024, under Sections 8/22 NDPS Act, Police Station C.B.N., District Lucknow, on his furnishing personal bonds and two reliable sureties of Rs.20,000/- each to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

(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.

¶16

Order Date :- 8.7.2024 Arun

¶17

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

Khalid Bilal v. Union of India Thru. Central Bureau of Narcotics Lko and

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Khalid Bilal v. Union of India Thru. Central Bureau of Narcotics Lko and

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Maa Mewati Educational and Welfare Trust, Ghazipur Thru. Authorized Signatory, Sri. Anil Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Medical Health and Family Welfare Lucknow and Ors.

Vimla Shankar Sansthan, Ghazipur Thru. Authorized Signatory, Sri Rajesh Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Medical Health and Family Welfare, Lucknow and Ors.

Nanke @ Shane Alam vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home

Ashok Alias Baba Ashokkumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Rahmat Sheikh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Lko. and 3 Others

Sachin vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.