Allowed

Vikki v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC7 Feb 2019BAIL/5521/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 5521 of 2019, the court granted bail to Vikki, accused under Section 22 of the N.D.P.S. Act for allegedly possessing drug-free Alprazolam. The court noted mandatory provisions were not complied with but granted bail subject to conditions regarding appearance and attendance at evidence.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of Rs. One Lac each.

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

¶1

Court No. - 69

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5521 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Vikki Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Kuldeep Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Kuldeep Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Abhinav Prasad, learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that 600 gram, contraband substance, i.e. Alprazolam, is said to have been recovered from the possession of the applicant. As a matter of fact no such recovery has been made from the applicant. He further submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. There is no independent or public witness to support the prosecution version. Mandatory provisions enumerated under section 50 of N.D.P.S. Act has not been complied with. Further there is no compliance of Section 42, 51 and 57 of the N.D.P.S. Act. It is further contended that applicant is languishing in jail since 11.1.2019, having no other criminal history and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial.

¶7

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

¶8

Keeping in view the quantity of recovered contraband, nature of offence, provisions for release of accused on bail, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, and submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge and reformative theory of punishment , and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.

¶9

Let applicant Vikki, involved in Case Crime No. 14 of 2019, under section 22 of N.D.P.S. Act, 1985, Police Station - Khurja Nagar, DistrictBulandshahr, be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties (Rs. One Lac each) (One should be of a family member) before the court concerned subject to 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 the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶11

(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.

¶12

(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.

¶13

(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

¶14

Section 313 Cr.P.C.

¶15

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

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

¶17

Order Date :- 7.2.2019 ssm

Vikki v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vikki 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

Jaan Mohammad Vs State of U.P.

Waseem Vs State of U.P.

Aashu Vs State of U.P.

Ram Pratap Yadav @ Pratap Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Ram Kumar Gupta Vs State of U.P.

Naved Khan @ Shahrukh Vs State of U.P.