Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 129160 (ALL)

INTAZ ALI v. UNION OF INDIA THRU. INSPECTOR CENTRAL BUREAU OF NARCOTICS LKO.

BAIL/2348/2025 · 2025-07-23

Karunesh Singh Pawar

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:42192 Court No. - 14 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2348 of 2025 Applicant :- Intaz Ali Opposite Party :- Union Of India Thru. Inspector Central Bureau Of Narcotics Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Pandey,Farooq Ayoob Counsel for Opposite Party :- S M Singh Royekwar Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri S M Singh Royekwar, learned counsel for respondent-CBI as well as perused the record. The present bail application has been filed by accused-applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No.01 of 2025, under Sections 8/21 of NDPS Act, Challaned by:- Central Bureau of Narcotics, Lucknow, District Barabanki. In the prosecution case it is alleged that on 15.02.2025 at about 11:30 hours during routine patrolling applicant was apprehended and from the personal search of the accused, from the right pocket of his jeans black and white polythene containing powder was recovered. After opening the black and white bag heroine was found it was weighed on the spot and 0.280 kg heroine along with the bag/polythene was found. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that recovered quantity is slightly above commercial. The measurement has been done along with the bag of polythene which is slightly above than the prescribed quantity under NDPS Act. Applicant has no prior criminal history. He submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. There is no independent witness of the recovery and there is non-compliance of Section 52-A NDPS Act. He submits that the applicant is in jail since 15.02.2025. Sri S M Singh Royekwar, learned counsel for CBI has opposed the bail application and has submitted that all the necessary compliance under NDPS Act has been done, the bail application is liable to be dismissed. On due consideration to the submissions advanced, perusal of the record as also the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 15.02.2025, applicant has no previous criminal history, admittedly the measurement has been done with the polythene bag which is slightly above the commercial quantity, the twin condition under Section 37 (ii) of the NDPS Act appears to have been satisfied and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant-Intaz Ali be released on bail in aforesaid case crime number subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions: (i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iv) 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. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (v) The applicant 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 Panel Code (now Section 269 of BNS). (vi) 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. (now Section 84 BNSS) is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Panel Code (now Section 209 BNS). Order Date :- 23.7.2025 Saurabh Yadav/- Digitally signed by :- SAURABH YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench