# Lalit Gupta v. State of U.P

- **Citation:** (2021) 11 ILRA 8
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2021-11-18
- **Case number:** Criminal Misc. 1st Bail Application No. 32726 of 2021
- **Bench:** Rahul Chaturvedi
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/lalit-gupta-v-state-of-u-p-46706
- **Pages:** 5

## Headnote

Law
-
Narcotic
Drugs
and
Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Sections
8/20 &50 - "obscura nubes dubiorum" (under
the dark cloud of doubts) - "GIVE A DOG BAD
NAME AND SHOOT HIM" - Uttar Pradesh Excise
Act,1910 - Section 60 - Indian Penal Code,
1860 - SECTION 82 , 174-A , 229.

Informant (Sub Inspector ) and co-accused - to burst
a bigger racket dealing in psychotropic substance -
accused indicated a person sitting over culvert - deals
with psychotropic substance - nabbed accused himself
disclosed that plastic gunny bag contains cannabis
(Ganja) - total recovery is 29.600 Kgs. of cannabis in
four packets - carried by applicant without any valid
license - bail application rejected by Additional District
&
Sessions
Judge/F.T.C.-2
-
Hence
this
bail
application.(Para - 5,6)

HELD:-Entire modus oprendi adopted by the police,
wherein the applicant has been lifted from his
residence and planted in the present case, puts the
entire prosecution story doubtful. Entire arrest is
flimsy, fallacious and based on a make-believe theory.
Alleged seizure of psychotropic substance too is a
doubtful proposition and makes entire prosecution
story as a malicious prosecution and the arrest an
illegal one. (Para - 11,12)

Bail application allowed. (E-7)

## Text

8 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES

12. The party shall file computer generated
copy of such order downloaded from the official
website of High Court Allahabad, self attested
by the applicant alongwith a self attested identity
proof of the said person (preferably Aadhar
Card) mentioning the mobile number to which
the said Aadhar Card is linked.

13. The concerned Court/ Authority/
Official shall verify the authenticity of such
computerized copy of the order from the official
website of High Court Allahabad and shall make
a declaration of such verification in writing.
----------
(2021)12ILR A8
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 18.11.2021

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE RAHUL CHATURVEDI, J.

Criminal Misc. 1st Bail Application No. 32726 of 2021

Lalit Gupta ...Applicant
Versus
State of U.P. ...Opposite Party

Counsel for the Applicant:
Sri Shrikrishna Shukla

Counsel for the Opposite Party:
A.G.A.

(A)
Criminal
Law
-
Narcotic
Drugs
and
Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Sections
8/20 &50 - "obscura nubes dubiorum" (under
the dark cloud of doubts) - "GIVE A DOG BAD
NAME AND SHOOT HIM" - Uttar Pradesh Excise
Act,1910 - Section 60 - Indian Penal Code,
1860 - SECTION 82 , 174-A , 229.

Informant (Sub Inspector ) and co-accused - to burst
a bigger racket dealing in psychotropic substance -
accused indicated a person sitting over culvert - deals
with psychotropic substance - nabbed accused himself
disclosed that plastic gunny bag contains cannabis
(Ganja) - total recovery is 29.600 Kgs. of cannabis in
four packets - carried by applicant without any valid
license - bail application rejected by Additional District
&
Sessions
Judge/F.T.C.-2
-
Hence
this
bail
application.(Para - 5,6)

HELD:-Entire modus oprendi adopted by the police,
wherein the applicant has been lifted from his
residence and planted in the present case, puts the
entire prosecution story doubtful. Entire arrest is
flimsy, fallacious and based on a make-believe theory.
Alleged seizure of psychotropic substance too is a
doubtful proposition and makes entire prosecution
story as a malicious prosecution and the arrest an
illegal one. (Para - 11,12)

Bail application allowed. (E-7)

(Delivered by Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi, J.)

1. Heard Shri Shrikrishna Shukla, learned
counsel for the applicant; Shri M.C. Chaturvedi,
learned A.A.G., assisted by Shri S.K. Pal,
learned G.A. and Shri Ghanshyam Kumar,
learned A.G.A. for the State. Perused the record.

2. Pleadings are exchanged between the
parties and the matter is ripe for final
submissions on merit.

3. Personal appearance of all the police
officials pursuant to the earlier order of this
Court dated 15.11.2021 is hereby exempted.

4. By means of the present bail application
the applicant, who is facing prosecution in
connection with Case Crime No.0356 of 2021,
u/s 8/20 of N.D.P.S. Act, P.S.-Phase-2, DistrictGautam Budh Nagar, is seeking his enlargement
on bail during trial. The applicant is in jail since
14.6.2021.

5. Shri Shrikrishna Shukla, learned counsel
for the applicant has drawn attention of the
Court to the F.I.R. lodged by the Sub Inspector
Ram Chandra Singh, P.S. Phase-II, NOIDA of
Gautam Budh Nagar Commissionerate on
14.6.2021 at 13.34 hours against the lone named
11 All. Lalit Gupta Vs. State of U.P.
9
accused person Lalit Gupta u/s 8/20 of N.D.P.S.
Act at P.S Phase-II, Gautam Budh Nagar with
the allegation that the informant, who is Sub
Inspector, along with his team members and coaccused Sonu to burst a bigger racket dealing in
the psychotropic substance, went to Kakrala 112
Feet Road, the accused Sonu indicated a person
sitting over the culvert, that he is a person who
deals with the psychotropic substance. The
police personnel overpowered that person and
caught hold of him. He disclosed his name as
Lalit Gupta s/o Ramesh Chandra Gupta, Police
Station -Sasni, District -Hathras. The nabbed
accused himself disclosed that the plastic gunny
bag which he is having, contains cannabis
(Ganja) and thereafter a usual formality of
asking the accused for alleged frisking in front
of Gazetted Officer, as contemplated under
Section 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act, was made by the
informant and the samples of psychotropic
substance were made for its testing. The total
recovery shown is 29.600 Kgs. of cannabis in
four packets, said to have been carried by the
applicant without any valid license.

6. The bail application of the applicant was
rejected by the learned Additional District &
Sessions Judge/F.T.C.-2, Gautam Budh Nagar on
02.07.2021. Hence this bail application.

7. It is contended by counsel for the applicant
that till date there is no laboratory report is on record
to substantiate that the alleged seized substance is
cannabis. Secondly, it was contended that the
mandatory requirement of Section 50 of the
N.D.P.S. Act has not been followed and as
mentioned above, it was a mere formality of the
F.I.R. by the informant. There is no independent
witness to the alleged recovery, though the incident
said to have been taken place in broad day light in
an open area. In Para-18 of the affidavit the
applicant himself has disclosed that from the Year
2001 to 2017 the applicant has got criminal
antecedents of 11 cases, out of which only three
cases relate to N.D.P.S. Act and rest of cases are of
Section 60 of the Excise Act. Since the applicant is
a resident of P.S.- Sasni, District- Hathras, and as
such, interestingly all the 11 cases to the credit of
applicant relate to P.S. Sasni, Hathras. From the
criminal antecedents of the applicant, it is evident
that there is no case registered outside the district
Hathras against the applicant. In fact, it is a first case
of
P.S.
Phase-II,
Gautam
Budh
Nagar
Commissionarate. In all these cases the applicant
has been bailed out and facing trial. After 2017 there
is no other case to the credit of the applicant.

8. Besides this, the primary argument made by
the learned counsel for the applicant is that the way
and the manner in which the applicant is being
involved/dragged in the case is depictive of a typical
approach by the police and a false implication by
them in nabbing the applicant. Learned counsel for
the applicant has filed supplementary affidavit dated
25.8.2021, in which he has tried to expose the
typical approach by the police, who for the reason
best known to them, nailed the applicant in the
present offence. It has been contended by learned
counsel for the applicant in the supplementary
affidavit that the applicant was, in fact, lifted from
his residence at Teacher's Colony Sasni Kotwali,
District Hathras by four masked persons in civil
dress. A CCTV has recorded every movement of
the act of lifting of the applicant by those four
persons. The wife of the applicant, who is a typical
house maker, was advised by her relatives to make a
complaint to the Superintendent of Police, Hathras
narrating the entire story for the alleged abduction
of her husband by four-five masked persons from
her residence on 11.6.2021 around 7.45 P.M. After
receipt of said application from the wife of the
applicant, S.P. Hathras on his own wisdom
entrusted the inquiry to one Shri Vipin Kumar
Yadav, S.I. who submitted its report on 5.8.2021.
The said report was received by the applicant's wife
through R.T.I., and as such, she received that
inquiry report on 5.8.2021.

9. In the said inquiry report, given by Shri
Vipin Kumar Yadav, addressed to C.O. City
10 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
Harhras dated 5.8.2021 has made a startling
revelation. This was indeed an eye-opener for
those who are often indulged in such type of
mal-practices. Said report is quoted herein below
:

सेवा में,

 रिपोर्ट थाना सासनी हाथिस

श्रीमान क्षेत्राधिकारी,महोदय

नगर हाथरस

धवषय - पत्राांक ज०सू०अ० 353/21 आवेधदका श्रीमती
धवनीता गुप्ता w/o लधलत गुप्ता धन० धिक्षक नगर
कस्बा थाना सासनी जनपद हाथरस के सम्बन्ध में
आख्या।

महोदय,

धनवेदन है धक सांलग्न प्रा० पत्र श्रीमती धवनीता
गुप्ता w/o लधलत गुप्ता धन० धिक्षक नगर कस्बा थाना
सासनी जनपद हाथरस की जाांच मुझ उपधनरीक्ष द्वारा
की गयी तो वाक्यात इस प्रकार पाये गये धक धदनाांक
11.06.2021 को वाधदया (आवेधदका) के मकान पर
चार लोग अपने मुहू पर मास्क लगाये हुए आये थे जो
आवेधदका के पधत लधलत गुप्ता को उठाकर ले गये
।जाांच से यह बात प्रकाि में आयी धक सादा कपडो जो
लोग आवेधदका के मकान पर आये थे वह नोएडा
पुधलस के अधिकारी कममचारी होने की जानकारी हुई
है। नोएडा पुधलस द्वारा थाना सासनी पर आने की
अथवा धकसी व्यक्ति को ले जाने की कोई सूचना
उपलब्ध नहीां करायी है। वाद में काफी जानकारी पर
ज्ञात हुआ धक थाना फेस II नोएडा पुधलस आयी थी।
आवेधदका के पधत के सम्बन्ध अन्य कोई जानकारी
प्राप्त नहीां हो सकी है।

सांलग्न
आख्या सादर सेवा में प्रेधषत है।

1-आवेिमय प्रा०पत्र-3 वकम

2-आख्या- 1वकम

ह०-अप०

Sir

5-8-21

Submitted

 (धवधपन कुमार यादव)

sd ill.

धवधपन कुमार यादव

6-8-21

उ०धन०

थाना- सासनी

जनपद- हाथरस

PNO- 132550028

10. Today, when the case is taken up,
Shri
M.C.
Chaturvedi,
learned
A.A.G.,
assisted by Shri S.K. Pal, learned G.A.
candidly and fairly conceded the fact that
there are excesses made on the part of the
police of concerned police station. There is
neither any Aamad Report at the police station
at Hathras nor the police personnel were in
proper dress, nor any proper process was
issued by the concerned court to arrest such
type of persons. This lifting of the applicant
was affected way back on 11.6.2021 by those
unnamed, masked persons and S.I. Ram
Chandra Singh, in order to win the laurels of
his senior officers, created a sham prosecution
story implicating the applicant in this offence.
It is simply a pitiable on the part of the
informant, who brought down the esteem of
the police to the shambles. There seem that the
image of police. No doubt, the applicant has a
criminal history of 11 cases, but no one has
got an authority to add one more to his credit
without having any substantial and credible
evidence. In the criminal law there is an aged
old phrase "GIVE A DOG BAD NAME AND
SHOOT HIM" and the police has done so in
the present case.

11. The applicant himself is facing the
misery of his own conduct but on account of
his past credentials the police personnel are
not authorized to add one more to his credit.
The entire arrest is flimsy, fallacious and
based on a make-believe theory.
11 All. Lalit Gupta Vs. State of U.P.
11

The Court records its strongest exception
and concern about the way and the functioning
of the police. The Court expects from the S.S.P.
Gautam Budh Nagar to take a stringent criminal
action against the informant of the present F.I.R.
and identify all those four-five masked persons
in a civilian dress, who lifted the applicant from
his residence on the odd hours of the night
without any authority or reason, after holding
an internal departmental inquiry by him alone,
and if they are found guilty, the S.S.P., Gautam
Budh Nagar is further directed to lodge an
F.I.R. against all the erring persons including
the informant of the Case Crime No.356 of 2021,
P.S.- Phase II, G.B. Nagar as well as all the
four-five persons who were masked and pounced
upon the applicant from his residence, lifted him
and booked him in the present offence without
any rhyme or reason and intimate the Court by
filing a proper affidavit before the Court
concerned i.e. the learned Additional District &
Sessions Judge/F.T.C.-II, Gautam Budh Nagar
latest by 31st December, 2021 as stringent
action would also be taken against the S.S.P.
concern for the willful defiance of this Court's
order.

12. The Court further expects that the
entire modus oprendi adopted by the police,
wherein the applicant has been lifted from his
residence and planted in the present case, puts
the entire prosecution story is "obscura nubes
dubiorum" (under the dark cloud of doubts).
The alleged seizure of psychotropic substance
too is a doubtful proposition and makes entire
prosecution story as a malicious prosecution and
the arrest an illegal one.

13. The Court appreciates the assistance
provided by Shri M.C. Chaturvedi, learned
A.A.G., who fairly conceded the drawbacks and
the loopholes of the prosecution.

14. Taking into account the manner and the
way in which the applicant has been lifted and
involved in the present case and keeping in view
the nature of the offence, evidence on record
regarding complicity of the accused 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 bail application is
allowed.

15. Let the applicant Lalit Gupta, who is
involved in aforementioned case crime be
released on bail on his furnishing a personal
bond and two sureties each in the like amount to
the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to
following conditions. Further, before issuing the
release order, the sureties be verified.

(i) THE APPLICANT SHALL FILE
AN UNDERTAKING TO THE EFFECT
THAT HE SHALL NOT SEEK ANY
ADJOURNMENT ON THE DATE FIXED
FOR EVIDENCE WHEN THE WITNESSES
ARE PRESENT IN COURT. IN CASE OF
DEFAULT OF THIS CONDITION, IT
SHALL BE OPEN FOR THE TRIAL
COURT TO TREAT IT AS ABUSE OF
LIBERTY OF BAIL AND PASS ORDERS
IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.

(ii) THE APPLICANT SHALL
REMAIN PRESENT BEFORE THE TRIAL
COURT ON EACH DATE FIXED, EITHER
PERSONALLY
OR
THROUGH
HIS
COUNSEL. IN CASE OF HIS ABSENCE,
WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THE
TRIAL COURT MAY PROCEED AGAINST
HIM UNDER SECTION 229-A IPC.

(iii) IN CASE, THE APPLICANT
MISUSES
THE
LIBERTY
OF
BAIL
DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER TO
SECURE
HIS
PRESENCE
PROCLAMATION UNDER SECTION 82
CR.P.C.,
MAY
BE
ISSUED
AND
IF
APPLICANT FAILS TO APPEAR BEFORE
THE COURT ON THE DATE FIXED IN
SUCH PROCLAMATION, THEN, THE
TRIAL
COURT
SHALL
INITIATE
12 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
PROCEEDINGS
AGAINST
HIM,
IN
ACCORDANCE
WITH
LAW,
UNDER
SECTION 174-A IPC.

(iv) THE APPLICANT SHALL
REMAIN PRESENT, IN PERSON, BEFORE
THE TRIAL COURT ON DATES FIXED
FOR (1) OPENING OF THE CASE, (2)
FRAMING
OF
CHARGE
AND
(3)
RECORDING OF STATEMENT UNDER
SECTION
313
CR.P.C.
IF
IN
THE
OPINION
OF
THE
TRIAL
COURT
ABSENCE
OF
THE
APPLICANT
IS
DELIBERATE
OR
WITHOUT
SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THEN IT SHALL BE
OPEN FOR THE TRIAL COURT TO
TREAT SUCH DEFAULT AS ABUSE OF
LIBERTY
OF
BAIL
AND
PROCEED
AGAINST HIM IN ACCORDANCE WITH
LAW.

(v) THE TRIAL COURT MAY
MAKE
ALL
POSSIBLE
EFFORTS/ENDEAVOUR AND TRY TO
CONCLUDE THE TRIAL WITHIN A
PERIOD OF ONE YEAR AFTER THE
RELEASE OF THE APPLICANT.

16. In case of breach of any of the above
conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation
of bail.

17. It is made clear that observations made
in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any
way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his
independent opinion based on the testimony of
the witnesses.

18. Since the bail application has been
decided under extra-ordinary circumstances,
thus in the interest of justice following
additional conditions are being imposed just to
facilitate the applicant to be released on bail
forthwith. Needless to mention that these
additional conditions are imposed to cope with
emergent condition-:

1. The applicant shall be enlarged on
bail on execution of personal bond without
sureties till normal functioning of the courts is
restored. The accused will furnish sureties to
the satisfaction of the court below within a
month after normal functioning of the courts
are restored.

2. The party shall file computer
generated copy of such order downloaded from
the official website of High Court Allahabad.

3. The computer generated copy of
such order shall be self attested by the counsel
of the party concerned.

4.
The
concerned
Court/Authority/Official
shall
verify
the
authenticity of such computerized copy of the
order from the official website of High Court
Allahabad and shall make a declaration of
such verification in writing.

19. However, it is made clear that any
wilful violation of above conditions by the
applicant, shall have serious repercussion on
his/her bail so granted by this Court and the trial
court is at liberty to cancel the bail, after
recording the reasons for doing so, in the given
case of any of the condition mentioned above.
----------
(2021)12ILR A12
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 17.12.2021

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MANOJ MISRA, J.
THE HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J.

Capital Case No. 1 of 2020
Connected with reference No. 1 of 2020

Nazil ...Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. ...Respondent

Counsel for the Appellant: