Allowed

Sandeep Kumar Yadav @ Golu v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC11 Sept 2019BAIL/26566/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bail application was allowed granting the release of the accused applicant under the NDPS Act on personal bond and sureties subject to specific conditions regarding tampering with evidence, cooperation with trial, and refraining from criminal activities during the trial.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on personal bond and two reliable sureties with conditions regarding tampering, cooperation, and no criminal activities during trial.

Sandeep Kumar Yadav @ Golu Vs State of U.P. — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 75

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 26566 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Sandeep Kumar Yadav @ Golu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sushil Kumar Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajendra Kumar-IV,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Sushil Kumar Dwivedi, learned Counsel for the accused- applicant, learned A.G.A. for State and perused the material available on record.

¶6

This bail application has been filed by the accused-applicant Sandeep Kumar Yadav @ Golu, who is involved in Case Crime No.- 193 of 2019, under Sections 8/20 N.D.P.S. Act , Police Station Kokhraj, District Kaushambi.

¶7

Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. He was merely a passenger in the car and had no knowledge about the presence of alleged recovered contraband article in the diggi of car. Neither any recovery has been made from the possession of the applicant nor there is any public witness of the alleged recovery. Further mandatory provisions of NDPS Act have not been complied with. It is further submitted that there is no previous criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 16.4.2019. 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

Learned A.G.A. oppose the prayer for bail.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and rival contention of learned counsel, role of accused, severity of punishment if applicant is convicted, without expressing any opinion upon the merit of the case, I am of the opinion that the accused applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶10

Accordingly, bail application is allowed.

¶11

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

¶12

The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

¶13

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.

¶14

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

¶15

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.

¶16

Order Date :- 11.9.2019

¶17

Ram Murti

Sandeep Kumar Yadav @ Golu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sandeep Kumar Yadav @ Golu 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Paran Lal Vs State of U.P. and Others

Sanjay Kumar and Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Raghunath and Others Vs State of U.P. and Others

Rajesh Prasad Vs State of U.P.

Ravi Vs State of U.P.

Sanjay Vs State of U.P.