Allahabad High Court
Amresh @ Dewana vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. on 18 January, 2023
Author: Rajeev Singh
Bench: Rajeev Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Court No. - 16 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9948 of 2022 Applicant :- Amresh @ Dewana Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Sagar Singh,Shri Ram Maurya Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State of U.P. and perused the record.
The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.301 of 2022, under Section 8/20 of Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances, Act, Police Station-Ajgain, District-Unnao, with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and he is in jail since 09.08.2022. He further submitted that quantity of alleged contraband is less than commercial quantity. He further submitted that there is no compliance of Section 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act. The prosecution story is not supported by any independent witness. He further submitted that investigation has already been concluded and charge-sheet has been submitted. In such circumstances, the applicant is entitled for bail.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant and submitted that alleged contraband i.e. 4 kg 700 gm was recovered from the possession of the applicant, but he does not dispute the fact that commercial quantity is 10 kg.
Considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. and going through the contents of FIR as well as record, it is evident that the alleged contraband is less than commercial quantity. I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Let the applicant-Amresh @ Dewana, who is involved in aforementioned case crime 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.
(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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 IPC.
(iii) 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., may be issued and if 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 IPC.
(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) 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.
Order Date :- 18.1.2023 Amit/-