Allowed

Mohd. Akil v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC9 Sept 2020BAIL/26244/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-judge criminal bail application was filed by Mohd. Akil in a prosecution case for possession of narcotics. The High Court granted bail with personal bond and sureties, subject to specific additional conditions regarding attendance and tampering with evidence, without commenting on the merits of the prosecution.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail with personal bond and two reliable sureties, subject to additional conditions preventing tampering with evidence and requiring attendance in court.

Mohd. Akil Vs State of U.P. — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 34

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 26244 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Mohd. Akil Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Syed Mohd. Khalid Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Mrs. Sunita Agarwal,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in case crime No. 0375 of 2020 under Sections 8/18 of N.D.P.S. Act, Police Station- Ijjatnagar, District- Bareilly with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

¶7

The contention of the learned counsel for the applicant is that by showing false recovery of 500 gms of Afim , which is above commercial quantity, but marginally, the applicant has been falsely implicated. It has been submitted that the mandatory procedure for recovery was not followed. It has been submitted that there is no independent witness of recovery and the recovery is nothing but farce. It has been next submitted that the applicant is innocent; he is in jail since 06.06.2020 and, in case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant, but could not point out anything material to the contrary.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions made, without commenting upon merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶10

Let applicant- Mohd. Akil s/o Afzal be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions, which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶11

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

¶12

(ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he

¶13

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.

¶14

(iii) 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.

¶15

(iv) 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.

¶16

(v) 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.

¶17

Order Date :- 9.9.2020 Himanshu

Mohd. Akil v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Akil 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

Ram Das and Ors. Vs State of U.P.

Faizan Ali Vs State of U.P.

Anjan Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P.

Shabban Vs State of U.P.

Sohail Vs State of U.P.

Sajid Vs State of U.P.