The High Court while entertaining an appeal against the said judgment and companyviction filed by the respondent herein, did number grant the respondents prayer for bail, companysequently the said application for bail was rejected on 9.7.2002.
On a second application filed by the respondent for grant of bail, the High Court allowed the said application by the impugned order dated 4.3.2003 solely on the ground that A 1 from whom the companytraband was recovered, was released on bail and the companytraband in question was number recovered from the respondent.
It is relevant to mention herein that against the grant of bail in regard to A 1 who was also enlarged on bail and whose enlargement on bail was made the sole ground for enlarging the present respondent bail, the Union of India has preferred a separate SLP in which numberice and number bailable warrants have been issued by this Court which have remained unexecuted till date.
The Union of India has preferred the above appeal against the said order of the High Court enlarging the respondent on bail.
The fact remains that the Union of India has challenged the grant of bail to said accused also.
Arising out of SLP Crl.
No.5200 of 2003 SANTOSH HEGDE,J. Leave granted.
The respondent herein was companyvicted by the Special Judge, N.D.P.S. Court, Lucknow, under section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 the Act and since he was a previous offender, the companyrt awarded him the enhanced punishment provided under section 31 of the Act and he was sentenced to undergo RI for 15 years with a fine of Rs.1,50,000 in default to undergo RI for an additional period of 2 years.
It is to be numbered that the respondent herein was accused No.2 in the said case before the trial companyrt while A 1 being a first offender was sentenced under section 21 of the Act to undergo RI for 10 years with a fine of Rs.1 lac in default of payment of fine he was sentenced to undergo RI for an additional period of 1 years.
