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