Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Krishan Pahal, J.
Azeemul Hasan – Applicant
Versus
Union of India – Opposite Party
Criminal misc. Bail application No. - 12003 of 2019, Criminal misc. Bail application No. - 8991 of 2020, Criminal misc. Bail application No. - 4019 of 2021
Decided On : 13-04-2022

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Applicant : Anshuman Singh, Alok Gupta, Farooq Ayoob, Mohd. Islam Khan, Shamshad Ahmad Khan, Asif Iqbal, Parmanand Gupta, Yogesh Gupta, Kapil Gupta
For the Opposite Party : Digvijay Nath Dubey

The judgment emphasized the importance of complying with the stringent parameters for the grant of bail under the NDPS Act and the right to liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

Headnote:
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act - Bail Applications - 8/20/25/27-A/28/29 - The court discussed the compliance of Sections 42, 43 & 49 of NDPS Act, confessional statement under Section 67, and the admissibility of evidence. The court also considered the delay in sending samples for chemical analysis, the requirement of independent public witnesses, and the mandatory provisions of Sections 42, 50, 52-A and 57 of NDPS Act. The court emphasized the importance of speedy trial and the right to liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
Fact of the Case:
The accused were found in possession of a large quantity of contraband in a truck. The defense claimed false implication and non-compliance with mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act. The prosecution argued conscious possession and the seriousness of the offense.
Finding of the Court:
The court rejected the bail applications, emphasizing the recovery of heavy contraband, the complicity of the accused, and the need for a speedy trial. The court also highlighted the importance of complying with the stringent parameters for the grant of bail under the NDPS Act.
Issues: The issues revolved around compliance with the NDPS Act, admissibility of evidence, delay in chemical analysis, and the right to liberty of the accused.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the seriousness of the offense, the recovery of contraband, and the need for speedy trial, as well as the stringent parameters for the grant of bail under the NDPS Act.
Final Decision: The bail applications of the accused were rejected, with a direction for expeditious trial within a year.

JUDGMENT :

1. Since the above three bail applications of the accused-applicants pertain to common recovery, therefore, I am deciding all these applications by a common judgement.

2. Heard Mr. Farooq Ayoob (in C.M.B.A. No.12003 of 2019), Mr. Parmanand Gupta (in C.M.B.A. No.8991 of 2020) and Mr. Kapil Gupta (C.M.B.A. No.4019 of 2021), learned counsels appearing for the applicants and Mr. Digvijay Nath Dubey, learned counsel for the DRI and also perused the material placed on record.

3. The applicant, Azeemul Hasan (in C.M.B.A. No.12003 of 2019) seeks bail in Case Crime No.06 of 2019, u/s 8/20 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, Challaned by D.R.I. Lucknow, District- Lucknow, during the pendency of trial.

4. The applicants, Salman Ali (in C.M.B.A. No.8991 of 2020) and Sannu Lal (in C.M.B.A. No.4019 of 2021) seek bail in Case Crime No.06 of 2019, u/s 8/20/25/27-A/28/29 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, Police Station-Gomti Nagar, District-Lucknow, during the pendency of trial.

BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE

5. On 1.5.2019 at about 09:00 AM, Sri Abhishek Pandey, Investigating Officer (I.O.) of Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Zonal Office, Lucknow (DRI) received an information from the Deputy Director, Lucknow that a truck bearing No. UP21-CN-0242 carrying Ganja is coming from Orissa and likely to reach Lucknow soon and is destined to Moradabad. For intercepting the said truck, a special team was constituted after compliance of Section 42 of NDPS Act. Independent witnesses were taken on way from Telibagh, Lucknow and the said truck was intercepted on the same day i.e. on 1.5.2019 at about 03:30 PM. The said truck was being driven by the accused Sannu Lal and the other two accused, namely, Salman Ali and Azeemul Hasan were found sitting in the cabin of the truck. The accused persons confessed to be carrying contraband in the said truck. The compliance of Sections 42, 43 & 49 of NDPS Act is said to have been made by the arresting team. As the truck was intercepted at a public place, it was taken to the Zonal Office of DRI and the search of the said truck was taken in the presence of the witnesses there. After opening the screws of the seat beneath it, a cavity was found and from the said cavity, cubical shaped polythene packets were found. In all 90 packets were recovered from the said cavity and after weighing it, 323.98 kilograms of contraband were found in total. Out of 90 packets, 43 packets were found below 3 kg and 47 packets were found above 3 kg. The said packets were marked as P-1 to P-90. The packets pertains to below 3 kg of weight were divided into two lots of 40 and 3 in number. Likewise, the packets pertain to above 3 kg of weight were also divided into two lots of 40 and 7 in number. Thus, all 90 packets were segregated into 4 lots as per shape, size and weight for taking sample. Thereafter, samples were taken from each packets of the said four lots and after mixing them together, 2-2 samples (in duplicate) of 24-24 grams were prepared. The said samples were sealed at the same place and the memo was prepared. The Registration Certificate of the said truck was found in the name of accused-applicant Azeemul Hasan. It has further been alleged by the prosecution that during investigation, it was found that all the three accused persons are said to have been executing the directions of one Waseem, who is the resident of Moradabad.

RIVAL CONTENTIONS

6. Learned counsels appearing for the respective applicants have stated that they have been falsely implicated in the present case. All the three applicants are residents of Uttar Pradesh and have nothing to do with the said contraband. Nothing incriminating has been recovered from their possession. The recovery has been made from cavity in the truck and not from the personal search. Learned counsels have further stated that the sample has been sent after a delay of seven days for chemical analysis. The said sample has not been taken from each packets rather