SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Online)(All) 24966

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
VEERPAL ALIAS GUDDU – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent
BAIL/37368/2022



An accused is entitled to bail under Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act if there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is not guilty.

Headnote:

BAIL - NARCOTIC DRUGS AND PSYCHOTROPIC SUBSTANCES ACT, 1985 - SECTION 37 - BAIL - ENTITLED - NON-COMPLIANCE OF MANDATORY PROVISIONS

Fact of the Case:

The applicant was arrested for possession of four quintal six kilograms of ganja. The prosecution prepared 14 samples of the recovered contraband substance but sent only seven samples for chemical examination. The remaining seven samples were kept at the police station. The applicant argued that this non-compliance with the mandatory provisions of the N.D.P.S. Act entitled him to bail under Section 37 of the Act.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the prosecution's failure to send all 14 samples for chemical examination created doubt about the prosecution's story. The court also noted that the applicant had been in jail since July 17, 2022, and that there was no independent witness to the alleged recovery. The court concluded that the applicant was entitled to bail under Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act.

Issues: Whether the applicant was entitled to bail under Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act due to the prosecution's non-compliance with the mandatory provisions of the Act.

Ratio Decidendi: In the case of Union of India vs. Shiv Shankar Keshari (2007) 7 SCC 798, the Apex Court held that in considering an application for bail under Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act, the court is not called upon to record a finding of not guilty. The court's inquiry is limited to whether there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is not guilty. In the present case, the court found that the prosecution's failure to send all 14 samples for chemical examination created doubt about the prosecution's story. The court also noted that the applicant had been in jail since July 17, 2022, and that there was no independent witness to the alleged recovery. The court concluded that these factors gave rise to reasonable grounds for believing that the applicant was not guilty and that he was therefore entitled to bail under Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act.

Final Decision: The court granted the applicant bail on the condition that he furnish a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

Court No. - 78

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 37368 of 2022

Applicant :- Veerpal Alias Guddu

Opposite Party :- State of U.P.

Counsel for Applicant :- Manoj Kumar Mishra

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

Heard Sri V.P.Srivastava, learned Senior Advocate assisted by

Sri Manoj Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant,

learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the

applicant Veerpal @ Guddu with a prayer to release him on bail

in Case Crime No.108 of 2022, under Section 8/22 N.D.P.S.

Act, P.S. Barahn, District Agra during pendency of the trial.

It is alleged in the FIR that from the possession of co-accused

person, four quintal six kilogram ganja have been recovered. It

is next argued that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely

implicated in the present case. From perusal of FIR, it is clear

that prosecution prepared 14 samples of recovered contraband

substance but had sent only seven samples for chemical

examination. Remaining seven samples were kept at police

station. He next argued that in view of Standing

Order/Instruction No.1 of 1989 dated 13.06.1989, from every

bundle sample should be prepared and sent for chemical

examination. Prosecution prepared 14 samples and sent seven

samples for chemical examination, which creates doubt of

prosecution story. Police party arrested the applicant from his

house and implicated in the present case. Mandatory provisions

of N.D.P.S. Act have not been complied with while arresting the

applicant. There is no independent witness of the alleged

recovery. Recovery is false and planted.The applicant is

languishing in jail since 17.07.2022. In case, the applicant is

enlarged on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail and

cooperate in trial. At the stage of consideration of bail it cannot

be decided whether offer given to the applicant and his consent

obtained was voluntary. These are the questions of fact which

can be determined only during trial and not at the present stage.

In case of prima facie non-compliance of mandatory provision

of Section 50 the accused is entitled to be released on bail

within the meaning of Section 37 of N.D.P.S. Act.

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant.

The Apex Court in the case of Union of India vs. Shiv

Shankar Keshari (2007) 7 SCC 798 has held that the court

while considering the application for bail with reference to

Section 37 of the Act is not called upon to record a finding of

not guilty. It is for the limited purpose essentially confined to

the question of releasing the accused on bail that the court is

called upon to see if there are reasonable grounds for believing

that the accused is not guilty and records its satisfaction about

the existence of such grounds. But the court has not to consider

the matter as if it is pronouncing a judgment of acquittal and

recording a finding of not guilty.

Considering the facts of the case and keeping in mind, the ratio

of the Apex Court's judgment in the case of Union of India vs.

Shiv Shankar Keshari (2007) 7 SCC 798, larger mandate of

Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the nature of

accusations, the nature of evidence in support thereof, the

severity of punishment which conviction will entail, the

character of the accused-applicant, circumstances which are

peculiar to the accused, reasonable possibility of securing the

presence of the accused at the trial, reasonable apprehension of

the witnesses being tampered with, the larger interest of the

public/State and other circumstances, but without expressing

any opinion on the merits, I am of the view that it is a fit case

for grant of bail.

Let the applicant Veerpal alias Guddu, who is involved in

aforesaid case crime, be released on bail on his furnishing a

personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the

satisfactio

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top