Allahabad High Court
Salman Alias Ullu vs State Of U.P. on 20 May, 2022
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 77 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 18220 of 2022 Applicant :- Salman Alias Ullu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Om Prakash Tripathi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.
The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant- Salman @ Ullu with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 631 of 2021, under Section 8/21 of N.D.P.S. Act, Police Station- Deoband, District- Saharanpur, during pendency of trial.
It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. As per the version of the F.I.R., 12g smack has been recovered from the possession of the applicant which is much below the commercial quantity. It has been argued that there is no compliance of Section 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act. It is next submitted that false recovery has been planted against the applicant to implicate him in the offence, the said recovery has not been witnessed by any independent witness. There is no analysis report of concerned forensic science laboratory from which it is established that the recovered material is smack. The applicant is languishing in jail since 23.10.2021. The applicant has criminal history of seven cases which has been explained in paragraph no.12 of the affidavit. In case, he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial by all means. Lastly, it is submitted that there is no chance of applicant fleeing away from judicial process or tampering with the witnesses.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the facts as raised by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Considering the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another, (2018) 3 SCC 22, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.
Let the applicant- Salman @ Ullu involved in the aforementioned 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, with the following conditions:-
1. The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.
2. The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.
3. The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.
4. The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel.
5. The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court at the time of 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 bail and proceed in accordance with law.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
Order Date :- 20.5.2022 Priya