Deepak Sahu v. State of U.P

Court No. - 74 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 48759 of 2023 Applicant :- Deepak Sahu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Satsangi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶1Sri V.P. Tripathi, 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 Sri V.P. Tripathi, 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 8/18/29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, 41/102 Cr.P.C. and 411, 413 I.P.C., Police Station Waziraganj, 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 180 gram opium has been shown from the possession of co-accused Pankaj Kumar. 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. It is next contended that identically placed co-accused Pankaj Kumar has been granted bail by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 46900 of 2023, Pankaj Kumar v. State of U.P., vide order dated 23.11.2023. 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 the provisions of Sections 42, 50 and 52 of the N.D.P.S. Act has not been followed. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. The recovered contraband is below the commercial quantity. At this stage, there is no cogent evidence that the recovered mobile phones are connected to any offence. Identically placed co-accused Pankaj Kumar has been granted bail by this Court. 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-Deepak Sahu, 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 :- 1.12.2023 SKT/- High Court of Judicature at Allahabad