Allowed

Saleem v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC10 Jan 2019BAIL/39900/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal bail application under the N.D.P.S. Act regarding seized smack, this court granted bail, noting non-compliance with statutory recovery provisions and reasonable apprehension of witness tampering, imposing strict conditions on presence and conduct.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on a personal bond with two heavy sureties, subject to conditions regarding presence and conduct during trial.

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

¶1

Court No. - 69

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 39900 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Saleem Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rakesh Pati Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Counter affidavit filed by the learned A.G.A. today in the Court is taken on record.

¶6

Heard Sri Rakesh Pati Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Abhinav Prasad, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State.

¶7

It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that 820 grams contraband article, i.e., Smack is said to have been recovered from the possession of the applicant. He further submits that there is no compliance of mandatory provisions of Sections N.D.P.S. Act, hence the recovery is bad in the eyes of law. The applicant has no criminal history with respect to the N.D.P.S. Act. The applicant is in jail since 11.7.2018.

¶8

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

¶9

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tempering of the witnesses and prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.

¶10

Let the applicant Saleem involved in Case Crime No.258 of 2018, under Section 8/21 N.D.P.S. Act, Police Station Bithari Chainpur, District Bareilly be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following condition:-

¶11

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶12

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶13

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under

¶14

Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶15

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶16

Order Date :- 10.1.2019 Dev/-

Saleem v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saleem 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

Sadiq Ali and Another Vs State of U.P.

Mudassir Khan Vs State of U.P.

Arvind Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Ravindra Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Raju @ Vikram Nat Vs State of U.P.

Amarnath Jaiswal Vs State of U.P.