Allahabad High Court
Ravi Yadav vs State Of U.P. on 28 March, 2023
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 88 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12238 of 2023 Applicant :- Ravi Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rakesh Kuamr Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed today on behalf of the applicant is taken on record.
Heard Sri Rakesh Kuamr Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Jhamman Ram, learned AGA for the State-respondent.
The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 15 of 2023, under Sections 8/20/25 NDPS Act, Police Station- Oonj, District- Bhadohi, during pendency of the trial in the court below.
According to the prosecution case, applicant and four others were apprehended while they were moving in a truck and from the truck total 60 Kg. ganja was recovered.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the entire allegations made against the applicant are totally false and baseless and in fact applicant was not present even in the alleged truck but he was implicated by the police only due to reason that police demanded illegal gratification from the applicant and other accused persons while they were going back from Varanasi to their house.
He further submitted that no individual recovery was shown from the possession of applicant and it is alleged that from the joint possession of five accused persons 60 Kg. ganja was recovered. He further submitted that at the time of recovery mandatory provisions of NDPS Act and Cr.P.C. have not been complied and one co-accused Prashant Sharma, who was also arrested along with applicant, has been released on bail by co-ordinate bench of this Court vide order dated 17.3.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 11603 of 2023.
He further submitted that although, applicant is having criminal history of 11 cases but criminal history of the applicant has been explained in paragraph no. 2 to the supplementary affidavit and only due to long criminal history, applicant was implicated in the present matter by the police. He further submitted that applicant, in the present matter, is in jail since 3.2.2023.
Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that from the possession of applicant and four others total 60 Kg. ganja was recovered which is commercial quantity and applicant is having criminal history of 11 other cases and out of 11 cases, one case is of NDPS Act which was of the year 2020 and this fact shows that after released on bail in that case, applicant again committed the offence under the provisions of NDPS Act, therefore, considering the provisions of Section 37 NDPS Act, applicant is not entitled to be released on bail.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.
As per prosecution, applicant and four others were apprehended while they were moving in a truck and from the truck 60 Kg. ganja was recovered. Although, co-accused Prashant Sharma, who was also apprehended along with applicant, has been released on bail by co-ordinate bench of this Court but case of applicant is distinguishable from the case of Prashant Sharma as applicant is having criminal of 11 other cases and out of 11 cases, one case is of Section 8/20 NDPS Act and it appears that applicant was released on bail in that case on 12.1.2021 and after released on bail he again committed the present offence.
As from the possession of applicant and other accused persons commercial quantity of ganja was recovered and applicant is also having previous criminal history of NDPS Act, therefore, considering the provisions of Section 37 NDPS Act, in my view applicant is not entitled to be released on bail.
Accordingly, the instant bail application is rejected.
Order Date :- 28.3.2023 KK Patel