Single judge order granting bail to Pintu Yadav in an NDPS and IPC case involving alleged carriage of Ganja. Applicant entitled to bail despite conviction under U.P. law despite residence in Bihar.
Ordering applicant Pintu Yadav to be released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 56
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 40769 of 2017
Applicant :- Pintu Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Chandra Bhan Kushwaha Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shashi Kant,J.
Heard Sri Chandra Bhan Kushwaha, learned counsel for applicant, Sri Mohd. Saleem, Brief Holder for the State of U.P. and perused the record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No.30 of 2014, under Sections 8/20 Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985; and 41, 411, 414 IPC, Police Station - Oonj, District - Bhadohi, with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.
The submissions of learned counsel for the applicant are that the applicant is innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the case. He is in jail since 31.08.2017. It is further submitted that FIR of the case has been lodged against unknown person. The applicant is owner of the vehicle in question allegedly carrying 20 kgs. Ganja. The applicant was neither arrested on spot nor any recovery has been effected from his possession. He is having no previous criminal history and one another criminal case has been lodged against him subsequent to the above case under the Arms Act. In these circumstances, the applicant is entitled for bail. In case of being enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant on the ground that the applicant is resident of Bihar while the alleged vehicle belong to State of West Bengal but fairly conceded that the applicant was neither named in the FIR nor arrested on spot nor any recovery has been effected from his possession.
Considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for parties, material available on record, as well as totality of fact and circumstances, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Let applicant Pintu Yadav be released on bail in Case Crime
No.30 of 2014, under Sections 8/20 Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985; and 41, 411, 414 IPC, Police Station - Oonj, District - Bhadohi, on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-
(1) Applicant will not try to influence the witnesses or tamper with the evidence of the case or otherwise misuse the liberty of bail.
(2) Applicant will fully cooperate in expeditious disposal of the case and shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when witnesses are present in the Court.
(3) Applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (a) opening of the case, (b) framing of charge; and (c) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.
Any violation of above conditions will be treated misuse of bail and learned Court below will be at liberty to pass appropriate order in the matter regarding cancellation of bail.
Order Date :- 15.3.2018 KA
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to release on bail in a case involving possession of narcotic drugs without spot arrest or recovery.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Pintu Yadav
Shashi Kant
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
Shashi Kant
Parties & counsel
