BAIL APPLN. 56/2022

Page 1 of 15

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

%

Reserved on: 15^th March 2022

Pronounced on: 13^th April 2022

+

BAIL APPLN. 56/2022

ALOK SAXENA

... Petitioner

Through:

Mr. H. C. Kharbanda, Mr. T. N.

Saxena, Mr. Sanjeev Kumar and

Mr. Arpit Saxena, Advocates

Versus

THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI)

... Respondent

Through:

Ms. Kusum Dhalla, APP for State

with Insp. Sandeep Kumar, P. S

NR-I Crime Branch

CORAM:

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA DHARI SINGH

J U D G M E N T

CHANDRA DHARI SINGH, J.

1.

The present petition has been preferred under Section 439 read with

Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter,

referred to as the “Code”) for seeking regular bail in FIR bearing No.

141/2021 under Section 22 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic

Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter, referred to as the “NDPS Act”)

registered at PS - Crime Branch, Delhi.

2.

The brief facts of the case as per the prosecution are that on 24^th

July 2021, an information was received in SOS-I/Crime Branch, that a

This is a digitally signed Judgement.

NEUTRAL CITATION NO: 2022/DHC/001341

BAIL APPLN. 56/2022

Page 2 of 15

person named Alok Saxena would be supplying smack in Delhi. The

information was shared with senior officers and necessary permission

under the provisions of the statute was obtained. The applicant was

apprehended by the Police and the contraband i.e. smack was recovered in

two packets of a total quantity of 2010 gms. Accordingly, FIR bearing No.

141/2021 under Sections 21/25 of the NDPS Act at Police Station Crime

Branch, Delhi was registered against the applicant. After completion of

the investigation, charge sheet was filed for commission of offence under

Section 22 of the NDPS Act against the applicant and Sections 21/25 of

NDPS Act was dropped on the basis of FSL report.

3.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant submitted that

the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. It is submitted

that the investigation has been completed and a chargesheet has already

been filed. It is also submitted that the applicant has been languishing in

jail since 24^th July 2021 and no useful purpose would be served by

keeping the accused/applicant in jail. It is further submitted that the

applicant has clean antecedents and has not been involved in any criminal

activities of any manner in the past.

4.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant submitted that

the entire story of the prosecution is unreliable, unworthy and is based on

concocted facts. It is submitted that as per the FSL report, the material

allegedly recovered from the possession of the accused/applicant has been

identified as (i) Acetylcodeine, (ii)Tramadol and (iii) Dextromethorphan.

This is a digitally signed Judgement.

NEUTRAL CITATION NO: 2022/DHC/001341

BAIL APPLN. 56/2022

Page 3 of 15

5.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant submitted that

the result of the testing kit is different from that of the FSL report, and

these facts create serious doubts in the prosecution‟s version. It is a well

settled law that the benefit of doubt goes in the favour of the

accused/applicant.

6.

It is further submitted that the material allegedly recovered from the

possession of the accused/applicant does not come under the purview of

the NDPS Act and therefore, no offence whatsoever, under the NDPS Act

is made out. It is also submitted that the applicant is having a valid licence

in his favour issued by the Drugs Control Department, Government of

NCT of Delhi and is authorized to sell, stock, exhibit, offer for sale, or

distribute Tramadol. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of applicant

submitted that the mandatory provisions under the NDPS Act especially

under Section 50 have not been complied with. It is also submitted that

since there is no material on record against the applicant, therefore, there

is no cha