Mohit Singh Aale vs State Of Uttarakhand

Alok Kumar Verma, J

Present Application has been filed for grant of regular bail in connection with the Case Crime No.142 of 2021, registered at police station Raiwala, District Dehradun.

Applicant is in judicial custody under Section 8/20/60 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, “Act, 1985”).

The First Bail Application (No.2670 of 2021) was rejected on 06.12.2021. The Second Bail Application (No.153 of 2022) was dismissed on 27.07.2023 as withdrawn by granting liberty to the applicant to file a fresh bail application with better particulars.

The case of the prosecution is that on 25.09.2021, the police party was checking vehicles at Police Check Post, Chhidderwala. On the basis of suspicion, a Swift Dzire Car (Registration No.UK07BV9421) was searched by the police. The said car was being driven by the applicant and one Sahnawaz was sitting on the back seat of the car. The police party recovered 238 injections of Diazepam and 215 injections of Buprenorphine from the said car. In spite of an endeavor, no public witness could be secured. The samples were sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory for examination. On conclusion of the investigation, charge-sheet was filed.

Heard Ms. Divya Jain, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Akshay Latwal, learned Brief Holder for the State.

Ms. Divya Jain, Advocate, appearing for the applicant, contended that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present matter. Noting was recovered from the said car. The said recovery was planted. Applicant does not have any criminal antecedents. He is a permanent resident of District Dehradun, therefore, there is no possibility of his absconding.

Ms. Divya Jain, Advocate, further contended that the charge-sheet was filed on 17.03.2022. The charge was framed on 01.06.2022. Despite obtaining several adjournments by the prosecution, only two of the fifteen witnesses have been examined to date.

Learned counsel appearing for the State has opposed the bail application. However, he has fairly conceded that there is nothing on the record to indicate that the applicant had earlier been involved in any unacceptable activities, and, only two witnesses out of fifteen witnesses have been examined by the prosecution till date.

The prolonged incarceration, generally militates against the most precious fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution and in such a situation, the conditional liberty must override the statutory embargo created under Section 37(1)(b)(ii) of the Act, 1985, as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Rabi Prakash vs. The State of Odisha, 2023 0 Supreme (SC) 707.

Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties and in the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion as to the merit of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves bail at this stage.

Third Bail Application is allowed.

Let the applicant – Mohit Singh Aale be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned on the following conditions:-

i) Applicant shall attend the Trial Court regularly and he shall not seek any unnecessary adjournment.

(ii) Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of this case.

(iii) Applicant shall not leave the country without the previous permission of the Trial Court.

It is made clear that if the applicant misuses or violates any of the conditions, imposed upon him, prosecution will be free to move the court for cancellation of bail.