Allahabad High Court Judgement

Allahabad High Court Judgement

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice at
JUDGEMENT HEADLINE : Small Or Commercial Quantity Of Narcotic Drug Is To Be Determined On The Basis Of Actual Contents Of Such Drug In The Recovered Article.
JUDGEMENT TITLE : Prem Shanker Alias Nanhey Pahelwan Vs. State Of U.P. On 03/07/2009 By Allahabad High Court
CORAM : Hon'ble Vijay Kumar Verma,J.


Court No. 52 

Crl. Misc.Bail Application No. 2385 Of 2009 

Prem Shanker @ Nanhey Pahelwan.....................................Applicant 
State Of U.P. ..................................................................Opposite Party 

Hon'ble Vijay Kumar Verma, J. 
Heard Learned Counsel For The Applicant, AGA For The State And Also Perused The Record. 
The Applicant Prem Shankar @ Nanhey Pahelwan By Means Of This Application Under Section 439 Of The Code Of Criminal Procedure (in Short, "the Cr.P.C.") Has Sought His Release On Bail In Case Crime No. 385 Of 2008 Under Section 8/21 N.D.P.S. Act P.S. Aliganj, Distict Bareilly. 
The Allegation Made In The FIR Lodged At P.S. Aligang (Bareilly) On 19.06.2008 By S.I. Vikas Kumar Saxena, Incharge S.O.G. Bareilly, In Brief, Is That On Being Apprehended On 19.06.2008, 300 Gm. Smack Was Recovered From The Accused Prem Shankar @ Nanhey Pahelwan. 
The Main Submission Made By Learned Counsel For The Applicant Is That Although 300gm. Smack Is Alleged To Have Been Recovered From The Applicant's Possession, But According To The Report (annexure-2), On Examination Of The Said Contraband In Forensic Science Laboratory U.P. Lucknow, It Was Found Heroin And Percentage Of Heroin In The Recovered Contraband Was Found 31.25%, Meaning Thereby That Actual Weight Of Heroin In The Recovered Contraband Comes 93.75 Gm, Which Is Below Commercial Quantity As Per Entry 56 Of Notification Dated 19.10.2001 Issued By Central Government And Hence The Applicant Should Be Enlarged On Bail. The Contention Of The Learned Counsel Is That Only The Actual Contents Of Weight Of The Narcotic Drug Or Psychotropic Substance, As The Case May Be, Is Relevant For Determining Whether It Would Constitute "small Quantity" Or "commercial Quantity" And On The Basis Of Percentage Of Heroin In The Recovered Article In Present Case Converted Into Weight, The Heroin Contents In The Total Quantity Of Recovered Contraband Would Be 93.75 Gm Only, Which Is Much Below Commercial Quantity. For This Contention, Reliance Has Been Placed By The Learned Counsel On E. Micheal Raj Vs. Intelligence Officer, Narcotic Control Bureau (2008) SCC (Cri) 558 And State Of NCT Of Delhi Vs. Ashif Khan @ Kalu (2009) 2 SCC (Cri) 54. 
It Is Also Submitted That There Is No Criminal History Of The Applicant, Who Is Languishing In Jail Since 20.06.2008. 
Next Submission Made By Learned Counsel Is That No Witness Of Public Was Called At The Time Of Alleged Recovery And After Planting Contraband On The Applicant, He Has Been Falsely Roped In This Case. It Is Also Submitted That Compliance Of Section 50 N.D.P.S. Act Was Not Made At The Time Of Alleged Recovery. 
The Applicant Is Confined In Jail For More Than A Year. There Is No Criminal History Of The Applicant. Therefore, In View Of The Above Mentioned Submissions Made By The Learned Counsel For The Applicant And Taking Into Consideration Over-all Facts And Circumstances Of The Case, But Without Expressing Any Opinion On Merit, The Applicant May Be Released On Bail. 
Let The Applicant Prem Shanker @ Nanhey Pahelwan, Son Of Har Lal, Be Released On Bail In Case Crime No. 385 Of 2008, Under Sections 8/21 N.D.P.S. Act, P.S. Aliganj, District Bareilly On His Executing A Personal Bond Of Rs. 40,000/- And Furnishing Two Sureties Each In The Like Amount To The Satisfaction Of The Court Concerned And Executing An Undertaking In The Following Terms:- 
1.The Applicant Shall Not Tamper With Prosecution Evidence By Intimidating The Witnesses. 
2.He Shall Cooperate With Investigation And Speedy Trial. 
3.He Shall Not Indulge In Any Criminal Activity Or Commission Of Any Crime After Being Released On Bail. 
On Violation Of Any Of The Aforesaid Conditions, The Prosecution Would Be At Liberty To Move Application For Cancellation Of Bail.

Go to Navigation