Latest News
Back
Document:
Applicant who was accused of 21 kg Charas granted Bail by Allahabad High Court
The High Court at Allahabad granted bail to a man who was accused of offenses under the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act of 1985 after 21 kg - (42 packets) of Charas was allegedly retrieved from him.
The Bail was granted by Single Judge Justice Siddharth to Lal Babu who was in prison since the 23rd of February, 2021 for offenses under Section 8 and Section 20 of the NDPS Act. The High Court relied on a formal pronouncement by the Supreme Court in Shiv Shankar Keshari v. Union of India. The Apex Cout in the case - Union of India vs. Shiv Shankar Kesari held while taking into account the application for bail with reference to Section 37 of the NSDP Act declared 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," the order said.
The alleged quantity recovered from the applicant is 21 kg which exceeds the limits of a normal commercial quantity of 1 kg. The Counsel appearing for accused Advocate Praveen Kumar Yadav argued that the police officers took 100 gms of Charas from a single packet for sampling which is completely against the mentioned rules of sampling under the NDPS Act.
It was further submitted that there was no concurrence with Sections 50 and 57 of the Act and at the level of consideration of bail, it was difficult to come to a decision whether an offer given to the accused and his consent obtained was voluntary. These are doubts which can be cleared only during trial.
The Additional Government Advocate opposed the plea for bail by arguing that the noviceship of the accused cannot be declared at the pre-trial stage and thus, the accused does not deserve any indulgence. It was further submitted that the reasonable grounds mentioned in Section 37(1)(b)(ii) of the NDPS Act mean something more than prima facie grounds.
Keeping in mind the arguments and facts submitted on behalf of the parties and the Supreme Court's decision in the Shiv Shankar Keshari Case (2007) 7 SCC 798 and Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, held that the applicant is eligible for bail.
"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," the Court said.
Before issuing the release order, the following sureties were to be verified.
1. 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.
2. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail 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 the law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
3. 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 default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with the law.
4. The party shall file a computer-generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
5. The concerned court/authority/official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
Citation- Bail no 5914 of 2021
Case Title - Lal Babu vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh
Counsel for Accused - Praveen Kumar Yadav, Shams Tabrez, and Shivanshu Goswami
Date of Judgement - 22nd of October 2021
Document:
