Allowed

Govind v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC12 Sept 2019BAIL/26396/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a bail application filed under the NDPS Act. Relying on the alleged non-compliance of Section 27 procedures and the quantity of contraband, the court granted release on bail with personal and surety bonds subject to specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions regarding interference with evidence and trial conduct.

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

¶1

Court No. - 75

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 26396 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Govind Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Balram Singh,Pratap Kanchan Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajendra Kumar-IV,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for State and perused the material available record.

¶6

This bail application has been filed by the accused-applicant Govind, who is involved in Case Crime No. 30 of 2019, under Sections 8(A) (C)/20 NDPS Act, Police Station Kotwali Dehat, District Banda.

¶7

Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that accused/applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that allegedly, 25 kg. ganja was shown to have been recovered from possession of the accused-applicant is totally false and fabricated. It is further submitted that N.D.P.S. Act has not been complied with at the time of alleged recovery. No public witness was taken at the time of recovery. Contraband is below commercial quantity. It is next submitted that in all the cases shown pending against the accused applicant, he has been enlarged on bail. Applicant is languishing in jail since 26.03.2019. It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but did not dispute the factual submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, rival contention of learned counsel for parties, detention in jail and without commenting upon the merit of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶10

Accordingly, bail application is allowed.

¶11

Let applicant Govind be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:-

¶12

The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten

¶13

the witnesses.

¶14

The applicant shall co-operate with the trial and shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for charge, evidence when the witnesses are present in the court, statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and argument.

¶15

During trial, he shall not indulge in any criminal activities.

¶16

In breach of any condition enumerated above, Trial Court shall be at liberty to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

¶17

Order Date :- 12.9.2019 I.A.Siddiqui

Govind v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Govind 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

Monu Vs State of U.P.

Anis @ Monu Vs State of U.P.

Baladeen Kushwaha Vs State of U.P.

Sugreev Sah Vs State of U.P.

Raghvendra Singh @ Bari Vs State of U.P.

Rashid @ Kitalli Vs State of U.P.