Allowed

Shailesh Kumar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC19 Jun 2018BAIL/22406/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application concerning an alleged offence under Sections 8B/20 of the N.D.P.S. Act for possession of charas, the High Court, without adjudging the merits, ordered the release of the applicant on bail with personal and surety bonds contingent on adhering to specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties with conditions regarding tampering, cooperation, and future conduct.

Shailesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 33

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 22406 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Shailesh Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anita Singh,Nirmla Kumari,Prem Babu Verma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶6

Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that 500 grams of charas is alleged to have been recovered from the possession of the applicant. In fact no such recovery was effected from the applicant. It is further submitted that since such recovery is not supported by independent witness, possibility of his false implication in the crime cannot be ruled out.

¶7

It is next contended that in the present case the prosecution has failed to follow strictly the provisions of Section 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act. There is no report of chemical analyst. It is also argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present crime with a view to cause unnecessary harassment and victimize him. There is no implication of the applicant prior to this incident. The applicant who is in jail since 04.05.2018 having no criminal history to his credit, deserves to be released on bail. In case the applicant is released on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶8

Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage who is involved in supplying contraband, therefore, the applicant does not deserve any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activity.

¶9

Without expressing any opinion on the merits, let the applicant Shailesh Kumar involved in case crime No. 43 of 2018, under Sections 8B/20 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, P.S. Basai Mohammadpur, District Firozabad 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 with the following conditions that :-

¶10

The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶11

The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶12

The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶13

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶14

Order Date :- 19.6.2018 A. Tripathi

Shailesh Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shailesh Kumar 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shravan Kumar Pal Vs State of U.P.

Pravesh Vs State of U.P.

Omkar Singh Vs State of U.P.

Meghnath and Another Vs State of U.P.

Vikas Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P.

Vipin Chauhan and Another Vs State of U.P.