Allowed

Hari Om v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC4 Jul 2018BAIL/21102/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal miscellaneous bail application under the NDPS Act, the court allowed the bail of the applicant, Hari Om, arrested with narcotic powder, finding a case made out due to lack of independent witnesses and procedural non-compliance by police, while imposing standard bail conditions.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail subject to personal bond, two sureties, and conditions against tampering with evidence, intimidating witnesses, or committing similar offences.

Hari Om Vs State of U.P. — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 41

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 21102 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Hari Om Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Sharma,Prashant Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

According to prosecution story F.I.R. was lodged against three accused persons namely Hari Om, Raj Kumar and Krishna alleging that on 19.2.2018 Hari Om (applicant) was arrested by the police with 400 grams Narcotic Powder and other accused namely Raj Kumar and Krishna were fled away.

¶7

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. There is no independent witness to support the prosecution version. The recovery shown by the Police is less than the commercial quantity. Provisions enumerated in the N.D.P.S. Act for search and seizure have not been followed. Provision of Section 50 N.D.P.S. Act has not been complied with. Applicant is languishing in jail since 20.2.2018 (near about four and half months) criminal history has been properly explained and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial.

¶8

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid fact as argued by learned counsel for the applicant and admitted that criminal history of the applicant has been properly explained.

¶9

Keeping in view the quantity of recovered contraband, nature of the offence, provisions for release of accused on bail, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, and submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, 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.

¶10

Let the applicant Hari Om involved in Case Crime No. 0062 of 2018, under Section 21/22 NDPS Act, Police Station Hathras Junction, District - Hathras be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:

¶11

The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶12

The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶13

The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶14

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.

¶15

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.

¶16

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.

¶17

Order Date :- 4.7.2018

¶18

A. Singh

Hari Om v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hari Om v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sadab Vs State of U.P.

Pushpendra Vs State of U.P.

Islam Vs Union of India

mohd. jahid Vs State of U.P.

Anees Vs State of U.P.

Shyam Bahadur Gaur Vs State of U.P.