Raghuveer v. State of U.P.
Case brief
What is this about?
In this bail application, the High Court allowed the applicant to be released on bail in a drift/quid case involving drugs, despite a notice being issued earlier, subject to standard conditions.
What did the court decide?
Release on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions.
What the court decided
Court No. - 41
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31723 of 2018
Applicant :- Raghuveer Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shailesh Kumar,Usha Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.
Initially the accused was on bail and due to his absence, N.B.W. was issued on 20.4.2017 and he was arrested by the police on 18.5.2017 till then he is languishing in jail (more than one year and three months) having no criminal history.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant went to Punjab for employment due to which he could not appear before the Court; he is a poor person; the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case; in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial. One more opportunity be granted to the applicant.
Learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and having considered the 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 bail application is allowed.
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the bail application of the applicant charged under N.D.P.S. should be allowed.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Raghuveer
- respondent
State Of U.P.
Coram
Aniruddha Singh
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Allahabad HC
- Decided on
- · August
- Registered
- Case no.
- BAIL/31723/2018
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court