Mohd. Iqbal v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Dept. U.P. Lko

Court No. - 27 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12695 of 2023 Applicant :- Mohd. Iqbal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Dept. U.P. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Km. Akhilesh Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J.

¶1Heard Ms. Akhilesh Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Ravish Chandra Mishra, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶2The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.343 of 2023, under Sections 8/21/29 NDPS Act, Police Station Jaidpur, District Barabanki.

¶3It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that 120 gms of morphine is alleged to have been recovered from the possession of the applicant which is below commercial quantity. It is further submitted that police party has implicated the applicant on the basis of false and concocted story. Learned counsel submitted that provisions of Section 50 of NDPS Act has not been followed. There is no eye independent witness of the case. The applicant has no criminal history and is in jail since 17.08.2023.

¶4Learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the fact that 120 gms of morphine has been recovered from the possession of the applicant which is below commercial quantity and there is no independent eye witness.

¶5Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, after hearing learned counsel for the parties and looking to the fact that small quantity of 120 gms of morphine has been recovered from the possession of the applicant, argument that police has falsely implicated the applicant and there is no independent eye witness therefore, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶6Let the applicant, Mohd. Iqbal be released on bail in the above case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned with the following conditions :-

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case,

(ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufÏcient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶7It is made clear that the observations made in this order are limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The Trial Court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything in this order. Order Date :- 30.10.2023 Pks High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench