Allowed

Bantu and Another v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC13 Nov 2018BAIL/42803/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal miscellaneous bail application, the Court allowed the bail for accused persons implicating in drug trafficking. The Court held that the applicant has made out a prima facie case for bail despite the nature of the offence, subject to standard bail conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicants Bantu and Ajeet to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each, subject to conditions.

Bantu and Another Vs State of U.P. — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 27 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 42803 of 2018 Applicant :- Bantu And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Kuldeep Singh Chahar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶2

Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.

¶3

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

¶4

According to prosecution case, F.I.R. was lodged against three accused persons namely, Ajeet, Bantu @ Kunwarpal and Ramu @ Ramashankar alleging that on 8.9.2018, they were arrested by the police with 4.750 Kg. Ganja.

¶5

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants have 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. Applicants are languishing in jail since 9.9.2018 (more than two months) having no criminal history and in case they are released on bail, they will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial.

¶6

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 applicants and admitted that applicants have no criminal history.

¶7

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.

¶8

Let the applicants Bantu and Ajeet involved in Case Crime No. 987 of 2018, under Section 8/20 NDPS Act, Police Station New Agra, District - Agra 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:

¶9

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

¶10

The applicants will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶11

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

¶12

The applicants shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which they are accused, or suspected, of the commission of which they are suspected.

¶13

The applicants 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶14

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

¶15

Order Date :- 13.11.2018//A. Singh

Bantu and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bantu and Another 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

Shoeb Chisti Vs State of U.P.

Dilip Kharwar Neta Vs State of U.P.

Mahboob Vs State of U.P.

Vineet Vs State of U.P.

Rajesh Vs State of U.P.

Raj Gagan Vs State of U.P.