Allahabad High Court
Mohd. Shadab vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. on 14 July, 2023
Author: Pankaj Bhatia
Bench: Pankaj Bhatia
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:45720 Court No. - 11 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8853 of 2023 Applicant :- Mohd. Shadab Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.
1. Supplementary affidavit filed today in Court is taken on record.
2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA and perused the record.
3. The FIR in question alleges that on 13.04.2023, on information received that a car was carrying some narcotics, the car was confronted. It was further alleged that on seeing the torch, the accused stopped the vehicle and fled from the spot. It is stated that in the light of the torch, the applicant was identified and thereafter, 268 gm of morphine was recovered from the car from which allegedly the applicant had fled. The entire incident is said to be around 23:10 hours.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant argues that the applicant has been identified only in the light of the torch; no recovery has been effected from the applicant. He further argues that the car does not belong to the applicant and the applicant has been wrongly roped in. As regard the quantity of the morphine recovered, he argues that 268 gm are slightly above than the commercial quantity which is 250 gm. As regard the criminal antecedent, a supplementary affidavit has been filed indicating that in all the cases, the applicant is on bail; bail orders are on record.
5. He further argues that no recovery has been effected from the applicant. There is no credible evidence to suggest that it was the applicant in the said car.
6. Learned AGA opposes the bail application by arguing that the quantity of morphine recovered is commercial quantity.
7. Considering the submissions made at the Bar, it is clear that the applicant has been roped in on the basis of the alleged identification carried out in the light of the torch at about 23:10 hours, the car does not belong to the applicant, no recovery has been effected from the applicant; and except for the statement that it was the applicant who was sitting in the car and was identified in the light of the torch, no prima-facie material exists as of now. Thus, reasonable grounds exist for believing that the applicant may not be guilty of the offence.
8. As regards the commission of the offence again, which is required to be tested under Section 37(1)(b)(ii) of NDPS Act, considering the fact that the applicant is on bail in all the cases of the criminal antecedents and prima-facie, reasonable ground for apprehending the applicant is not said to be made out at this stage, however, without going into the evidence, the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. In view thereof, the application is allowed.
9. Let the applicant Mohd. Shadab be released on bail in FIR No.164 of 2023, under Section 8/21/60(3) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, P.S. Zaidpur, District Barabanki on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of court concerned with the following conditions:
(a) The applicant shall execute a bond to undertake to attend the hearings;
(b) The applicant shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused or suspected of the commission; and
(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.
Order Date :- 14.7.2023 nishant