Allowed

Narendra Singh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC21 Feb 2019BAIL/4283/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under the NDPS Act, the court noted allegations of false implication and procedural lapses regarding contraband recovery. Considering the severity of the charge but also the possibility of tempering, the court granted bail subject to stringent conditions to ensure the applicant's presence and prevent abuse of liberty.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two sureties (Rs. 1.00 lac each), subject to strict conditions regarding appearance and conduct.

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

¶1

Court No. - 69

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4283 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Narendra Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard Sri A.K.Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Abhinav Prasad, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State.

¶6

It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive and he has committed no offence. It is next contended that 1.700 kg. contraband article i.e. "Ganja" is said to have been recovered from the possession of the applicant. In fact, nothing has been recovered from his possession.There is no independent or public witness of the alleged recovery.He further submits that there is no compliance of mandatory provisions of Section 50 of N.D.P.S. Act, hence the recovery is bad in the eyes of law. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. It has also been submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 2.12.2018.The applicant has criminal history of two cases, but he is on bail in these cases, which has been properly explained in paragraph 9 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application.

¶7

Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.

¶8

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 and reformative theory of punishment, and also considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, 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, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶9

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case let the applicant Narendra Singh involved in Case Crime No.135 of 2018, under Sections 8/20 of N.D.P.S. Act, 1985, Police Station Anpara, District Sonbhadra be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties (Rs.1.00 lac each)(One should be of family member) to the satisfaction of court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶10

(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

¶11

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 Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶14

(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.

¶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 :- 21.2.2019 IA

Narendra Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Narendra Singh 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

Ikrar Vs State of U.P.

Farid Vs State of U.P.

Mubssir Vs State of U.P.

Wasim Vs State of U.P.

Shanoo Vs State of U.P.

Pappu @ Vikaruddin Vs State of U.P.