Sushila v. State of U.P

Court No. - 74 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 53041 of 2023 Applicant :- Sushila Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Atul Pandey,Dewarshi Kumar Rai Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

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

¶3The 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. 499 of 2023, under Section 8/20 Narcotics Drugs and Phychotropic Substances Act, Police Station-Kotwali, District-Fatehpur, during the pendency of trial.

¶4Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. False recovery of 12 kg 500 gram ganja has been shown from a scooty, which is below commercial quantity. The applicant was a pillion rider on the said vehicle. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. The mandatory provisions of Sections 42, 50, 51 and 52A of N.D.P.S. Act have not been complied with. There is no F.S.L. report to establish that the substance recovered is ganja. The applicant is a lady and is in jail since 31.07.2023, having no criminal history and in case, she is enlarged on bail, she 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 this Court prima facie finds that the mandatory provisions of Sections 42, 50, 51 and 52A of N.D.P.S. Act have not been complied with. There is no independent witness to the recovery. The alleged contraband was below commercial quantity. Further, the applicant is a lady and has no criminal antecedents, and has remained 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 merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶7Let the applicant Sushila, involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the conditions that she:

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

(ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

(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 :- 11.12.2023 Sachin Mishra High Court of Judicature at Allahabad