AKHIL KUMAR Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Amrendra Nath Singh, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Vikas Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State and perused the record of the case.

(2.) The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 471 of 2011, under Section 8/22 of Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, police station Katghar, district Moradabad during the pendency of trial.

(3.) It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is Sub-Inspector and at the relevant point of time, he was posted at police station Katghar, district Moradabad. On 31.07.2006, the applicant in discharge of his official duties, recovered 100 gms of Heroine from the possession of one Sarfaraz Ahmad and after completing all the required formalities, recovery memo was prepared and subsequently, charge sheet has been submitted on 23.08.2006 against the accused Sarfaraz Ahmad, on which cognizance was taken on 04.10.2006 and after about two years on 23.05.2008, an application was moved by the police for seeking permission for further investigation in the matter, but no permission was granted by the court. Thereafter, on 15.01.2010, charges have been framed against the accused Sarfaraz Ahmad. The police has again moved an application on 25.01.2011 seeking permission for further investigation in the matter, but the said application was not allowed. Thereafter, the police has further investigated the matter without any permission of the court and submitted final report dated 26.09.2011. The said final report was rejected by the Additional Sessions Judge, court No. 9, Moradabad vide order dated 20.11.2012, which has been brought on record as annexure 19 to the bail application. On the basis of said final report, first information report being Case Crime No. 471 of 2011, under section 8/22 of N.D.P.S. Act and Case Crime No. 472 of 2011, under sections 467, 468, 471, 343, 218 and 120-B IPC was lodged on 29.10.2011 against the applicant and other police personnel, who were accompanying with him in raiding in seizure case of 100 gms of Heroine. Main substratum of argument of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant has recovered 100 gms of Heroine in discharge of his official duties. The first information report has been lodged against the applicant pursuant to final report dated 26.09.2011, which has already been rejected by the trial court vide order dated 20.11.2012, therefore, no further action can be taken against the applicant on the basis of said final report dated 26.09.2011. It is also pointed out by the learned counsel for the applicant that in Case Crime No. 472 of 2011, the applicant has already been granted bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 07.10.2020 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 31346 of 2020. It is next contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that in the present case, charge sheet has been submitted after seeking sanction for prosecution against the applicant. The said sanction order dated 29.11.2016 has been challenged in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 4680 of 2017, in which said order dated 29.11.2016 has been stayed by the Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 29.03.2017, copy of said order has been appended at page 144 of the bail application. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case by the police in collusion with accused Sarfaraz Ahmad. There is no prospect of trial of the present case being concluded in near future due to heavy dockets. The applicant has no criminal history to his credit. The applicant is languishing in jail since 05.08.2020 and in case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.