The Allahabad High Court has granted bail to Sunil Kumar Mishra, who has been in jail since July 23, 2017 under the Narcotic Drug and Psychotropic Substance (NDPS) Act.
A Single-Judge Bench of Justice Om Prakash-VII passed this order while hearing a Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application filed by Sunil Kumar Mishra.
It is submitted by the Senior Counsel appearing for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case. He has not committed the offence. Though this is second bail application on behalf of the applicant yet in similar circumstances, second bail application of co-accused Anil Kumar Mishra and third bail application of co-accused Rakesh Singh have been allowed on June 28, 2021 and February 22, 2021.
It is next contended that nothing has been recovered from the applicant. If the entire prosecution case is taken into consideration, then also, the applicant was only sitting on the vehicle concerned. Recovery has been shown from the possession of the co-accused, who was travelling in the Volvo Bus. Statements recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS Act can also not be taken into consideration against the applicant.
Senior Counsel referred to law laid down by the Apex Court in Toofan Singh vs State of Tamil Nadu, 2020 SCC Online SC 882. It was further submitted that relying on the ratio laid down in Toofan Singh case co-accused Anil Kumar Mishra and Rakesh Singh have been allowed bail.
It was next contended that conscious possession can also not be construed in the matter against the applicant and the applicant cannot be denied bail on the ground of criminal history.
The applicant is languishing in jail since March 23, 2017 and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.
It is submitted that the trial has not concluded as yet.
On the other hand, the Counsel appearing for the NCB opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that this is the second bail application on behalf of the applicant. He was a habitual offender and was present on the spot at the time of recovery.
The conscious possession of the recovered contraband can safely be presumed against the applicant. Grounds taken in this application have already been taken and considered in the first bail application of the applicant.
The applicant cannot be allowed bail in view of the law laid down in Toofan Singh case, as there is recovery of huge quantities of contraband from the possession of all co-accused and also there is evidence in the form of call details collected by the Investigating Officer during investigation.
All the circumstances shown by the investigating agency clearly demonstrate that the applicant was involved in the matter.
Daya Shanker Mishra, Senior Counsel appearing for the applicant, argued that there was no evidence case against the applicant to connect him with the matter. Nothing has been recovered from the possession of the applicant.
Simply on the ground of criminal history, applicants cannot be denied bail particularly when criminal history has been explained.
“Having regard to the entire facts and circumstances of the case, considering the submissions made by the counsel for the parties and keeping in view the period of detention of the applicant, the fact that nothing has been recovered from the possession of the applicant, the fact that co-accused having identical role have been released on bail and also the law laid down by the Apex Court in Toofan Singh case and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail”, the Court observed while allowing the bail application.
The Court ordered that, Let the applicant Sunil Kumar Mishra involved in NCB Case under Sections 8/21/29 NDPS Act, P.S N.C.B, District – Lucknow be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions.
1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
2. The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
3. The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
4. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.
5. 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.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move the bail cancellation application before the Court, the Bench added.