Allowed

Yogendra Tiwari v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC18 Feb 2019BAIL/4043/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal miscellaneous bail application under the N.D.P.S. Act, theSingle Judge granted bail to the applicant citing parity with a co-accused and invoking Article 21. The applicant was released on personal bonds with two sureties subject to standard conditions regarding trial attendance and witness interference.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing personal bonds with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

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

¶1

Court No. - 69

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4043 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Yogendra Tiwari Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Brij Lal Shukla,Ajay Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- A.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 learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Sanjay Singh, learned A.G.A.-I appearing for the State.

¶7

It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the co-accused Mukesh Kumar Mandal has been granted bail by another Bench of this Court on 21.6.2018 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.22726 of 2018, a copy of said order has been produced by the learned counsel for the applicant, which is taken on record and the case of the applicant stands on identical footing, hence the applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. The applicant has no criminal history. The applicant is in jail since 20.9.2017.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail, but could not dispute the aforesaid fact as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶9

Having heard the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another , reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 and without expressing any view on the merit of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.

¶10

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case let the applicant Yogendra Tiwari involved in Case Crime No.674 of 2017, under Sections 8/20 N.D.P.S. Act, Police Station Sector 58, District Gauam Budh Nagar be released on bail on his furnishing personal bonds with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶11

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶12

(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶13

(iii) The applicant will appear before the trial Court on the date fixed.

¶14

It is further directed that the identity, status and residence proof of the sureties be verified by the authorities concerned before they are accepted.

¶15

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

¶16

Order Date :- 18.2.2019 Dev/-

Yogendra Tiwari v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yogendra Tiwari 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Raju Vs State of U.P.

Kurban Vs State of U.P.

Pawan Kumar Gupta Vs State of U.P.

Farman Vs State of U.P.

Umar Vs State of U.P.

Ram Kumar Vs State of U.P.