Pankaj Kumar v. State of U.P

Court No. - 74 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 46900 of 2023 Applicant :- Pankaj Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ravi Shankar Tripathi,Hemant Kumar Patel Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶1Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, learned A.G.A., submits that he has received the instructions and he has no objection if the bail application is decided on merits.

¶2Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State-opposite party.

¶3The instant bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 399 of 2023, under Sections 8/18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, 41/102 Cr.P.C. and 411, 413 I.P.C., Police Station Wazirganj, District Budaun during the pendency of trial.

¶4Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. False recovery of mobile phones and opium measuring 180 grams has been shown from the applicant. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. The mandatory provisions of Sections 42, 50 and 52 of the N.D.P.S. Act have not been complied with. There is no FSL report to establish that the substance recovered is opium. The recovered contraband is below commercial quantity. The recovered mobile phones are not connected with any offence. The applicant is in jail since 20.08.2023 having no criminal history and in case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

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

¶6Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of the record, this Court prima facie finds that there is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. The mandatory provisions of Sections 42, 50 and 52 of the N.D.P.S. Act have not been complied with. The recovered contraband is below commercial quantity. At this stage there is no evidence that the recovered mobile phones are connected with any offence. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. Moreover, the applicant has remained confined for almost three months and after submission of the charge-sheet there is no hope of early conclusion of trial and no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or delay the trial or intimidate the witness, therefore, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶7Let the applicant-Pankaj Kumar, involved in the aforesaid case, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned subject to the conditions that he:

(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 :- 23.11.2023 SKT/- High Court of Judicature at Allahabad