Anil Varshney v. State of U.P

Court No. - 74 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 42013 of 2023 Applicant :- Anil Varshney Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vishal Kushwaha,Alka Upadhyay,Manish Tiwari,Neetu Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶1Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri V.P.Tripathi, learned AGA for the State-opposite party.

¶2The instant bail application, under Section 439 Cr.P.C., has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.240 of 2023, under Section 21/22 N.D.P.S. Act, Police Station-Hathras Gate, District Hathras, during the pendency of trial.

¶3Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. False recovery of 990 gm. diazepam powder has been shown from the possession of the applicant. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. No accurate scientific instruments were used for weightment. The mandatory provisions of Sections 42, 50 and 51 of N.D.P.S. Act have not been complied with. The applicant is in jail since 21.07.2023 having no criminal history and in case, he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶4Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶5Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record, I am of the prima facie view that the mandatory provisions of Sections 42, 50, 51 and 52-A of N.D.P.S. Act have not been complied with. Inventory of the seized contraband was not duly certified by the Magistrate. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. Hence, there are reasonable grounds to believe that the applicant shall not indulge himself in other cases of like nature. Further, the applicant has remained confined confined for more than four months 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 applicant, 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 applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶6Let the applicant Anil Varshney involved in the aforesaid case 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 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.

¶7In 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 Lbm/- High Court of Judicature at Allahabad