Mohd. Wakeel v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.

The first bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail during trial in Case Crime No.93 of 2024, under Section 8/21 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act,1985 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act 1985'), Police Station- Inhauna, District- Amethi.

As per prosecution version, the contraband substance, i.e. 300 grams of 'Smack' is said to be recovered from the possession of the applicant.

Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been planted by the police in the instant matter. He next added that 300 grams of 'Smack' is said to be recovered from the possession of the present applicant, which is above the commercial quantity. Further there is no public eye witness of the alleged recovery. He further submits that there is non-compliance of most of the provisions of the N.D.P.S. Act, 1985. He further added that there is a case criminal history of the applicant, which has been explained and he is languishing in jail since 3012.2024. He next submits that the applicant undertakes that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. He further submits that co-accused Shamsheer Alam has already been enlarged on bail by a Co- ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 27.01.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.763 of 2025. It is also submitted that the samples prepared were not before any Gazetted Officer or Magistrate as is required in terms of the Act, 1985.

Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer of bail and submits that applicant was involved in committing the aforesaid offence as contraband substance i.e. 'Smack', has been recovered from his possession and, as such, the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail.

Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perusal of material on record, prima facie, and subject to further evidence being led in trial, it appears that applicant has been shown as involved in recovery of 300 grams of 'Smack' but there does not appear to be an independent witness of the alleged recovery; it has also been alleged that there is non compliance of the provisions of the N.D.P.S. Act, 1985; previous criminal history of the applicant has already been explained and he is in jail since 13.12.2024; it appears that co-accused Shamsheer Alam has already been enlarged on bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 27.01.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.763 of 2025.

Considering the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.

Let the applicant- Mohd. Wakeel involved in the aforementioned 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, with the following conditions:- (1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial; (2) 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. He shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code; (3) 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.; and (4) 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, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case. Order Date :- 3.4.2025 Shubhankar SHUBHANKAR THAKUR SHUBHANKAR THAKUR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Lucknow Bench