MOHAMMAD SABBU Vs. STATE OF U P
LAWS(ALL)-2009-5-113
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on May 20,2009

MOHAMMAD SABBU Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Vijay Kumar Verma, J. - (1.) IN this bail application, prayer for bail has been made on behalf of accused-applicant Mohammad Sabbu, s/o Vajeer Miyan, in case Crime No. 447 of 2007, under section 8/20 NDPS Act, P.S Khadda, District Kushi Nagar.
(2.) THE allegations made in the FIR lodged on 27.12.2007 at P.S. Khadda, District Kushi Nagar, by S.O. Shamsher Bahadur Singh, in brief, are that on getting information from informer that some persons are carrying ganja in Jeep No. U.P.52B/1741, the said jeep was stopped by the police on 27.12.2007 at about 1.30 p.m. and four persons including the applicant Mohd. Sabbu were apprehended, who were sitting in Jeep. When search of the cabin of jeep was made, then 21 small and big packets were recovered. On inquiry, the applicant Mohd. Sabbu claimed 50 kg. Ganja belonging to him. Other accused also claimed separate quantity of Ganja belonging to them. Total 160 Kg. Ganja was recovered from the jeep, which was seized and the accused persons were arrested. I have Heard Sri Ramesh Chandra, Advocate, appearing for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the entire record carefully. Firstly, it was submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that compliance of Section 50 NDPS Act was not made, as prior to making search of the jeep, option to get to the search made before the Magistrate or gazetted officer was not given to the accused persons and search was made by the arresting officer himself, which is not permissible.
(3.) IT was further submitted that no person of public was called to be the witness of search and hence, merely on the basis of the statements of police personnel, the applicant cannot be detained further in jail. IT was also submitted in this context that the applicant is in jail since 27.12.2007 and hence, on the basis of long detention period also, the applicant deserves bail now, as his fundamental right of speedy trial envisaged under Article 21 of the Constitution is being violated. It was also submitted that entire seized Ganja was not sent for examination to Forensic Science Laboratory and hence, on this ground also, the applicant is entitled for bail.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.