Narendra Ray and Another v. State of U.P

Court No. - 74 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 47184 of 2023 Applicant :- Narendra Ray And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Krishna Kant Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶1Learned AGA for the State submits that the instructions have been received and he has no objection in case the bail application is decided on merits.

¶2Heard learned counsel for the applicants and Sri P.D.Tripathi, learned AGA for the State-respondent.

¶3The instant bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicants on bail in Case Crime No. 279 of 2023, under Sections 8/20 of N.D.P.S. Act, Police Station Chandauli, District Chandauli, during the pendency of trial.

¶4Counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the instant case. False recovery of 10Kg. ganja has been shown from the possession of the applicants. There is no independent witness to the recovery. The recovered contraband is below commercial quantity. The mandatory provisions of Sections 42, 50 and 51 of the N.D.P.S. Act have not been complied with. There is no FSL report to establish that the substance recovered is ganja. The applicants are in jail since

14.10.2023 having no criminal history and in case they are enlarged on bail, they will not misuse the said liberty.

¶5Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶6Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record, I am of the prima facie view that the recovered contraband is below commercial quantity. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. The mandate of Chapter V of the NDPS Act has not been followed. The sampling has not been done in the presence of Magistrate, which is required under Section 52A of the NDPS Act. The applicants have no criminal antecedents. Further the applicants have remained confined for more than one month and after submission of the charge-sheet there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, more so when no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicants, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or delay the trial or intimidate the witness, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicants are entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶7Let the applicants Narendra Ray and Raju Tiwari, involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the conditions that they:

(i) shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court;

(ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; and,

(iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.

¶8In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. Order Date :- 17.11.2023 Lbm/- High Court of Judicature at Allahabad