Allowed

Chand v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC9 Sept 2019BAIL/16474/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Hon'ble Siddharth, J. granted bail to the applicant in a case under the N.D.P.S. Act, referring to Dataram Singh. Bail was granted with conditions regarding evidence tampering, trial cooperation, and no further criminal activities, and a one-year timeline for trial conclusion.

What did the court decide?

Release of applicant on bail subject to personal bond and two sureties; order to conclude trial within one year.

Chand Vs State of U.P. — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 78

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16474 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Chand Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Manish Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

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

¶6

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Chand with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.33 of 2018, under Sections 8/21 N.D.P.S. Act, Police Station G.R.P. Agra Fort, DistrictAgra, during pendency of trial.

¶7

Submission is that applicant has no criminal history under N.D.P.S. Act. The applicant has criminal history of other cases explained in paragraph No. 8 of the affidavit in support of the bail application. The applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant is languishing in jail since 17.01.2018. 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 prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserves any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.

¶9

Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime 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

¶11

evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶12

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

¶13

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

¶14

In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶15

Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶16

The court below is directed to conclude the trial in the aforesaid case, within a period of one year, from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

¶17

Order Date :- 9.9.2019 Ruchi Agrahari

Chand v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chand 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sanu Vs State of U.P.

Mohamed Naeem Shah Vs State of U.P.

Matloob Ahmad Vs State of U.P.

Mungeri Lal @ Mauhar Singh Vs State of U.P.

Shaukin Vs State of U.P.

Ravi Vs State of U.P.