Allowed

Vinay Varshney @ Bittu v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC22 Sept 2020BAIL/4899/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge considered a bail application under the N.D.P.S. Act regarding the possession of diazepam. Granting bail without expressing an opinion on merits, the court specified conditions including attendance for trial and furnishing a computerized order copy.

What did the court decide?

Bail released on personal bond and two sureties upon satisfying conditions of non-tampering, sincere trial cooperation, and later furnishing an authenticated computerized court order.

Vinay Varshney @ Bittu Vs State of U.P. — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 70

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4899 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Vinay Varshney @ Bittu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vikrant Neeraj,Janardan Prasad Tripathi

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶6

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

¶7

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Vinay Varshney @ Bittu, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 323 of 2019 under Section 21/22 of N.D.P.S. Act, Police Station- Akrabad, DistrictAligarh, during pendency of trial.

¶8

There is allegation against the applicant that he was found in possession of 630 gm of diazepam. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that there is no compliance of Section 50 & 57 of the N.D.P.S. Act. The applicant alleges false implication by the police. The applicant has no criminal history to his credit and is in jail since 08.12.2019.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant.

¶10

Having considered the material on record, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that :-

¶11

The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶12

The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶13

The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶14

In case the applicant has been enlarged on short term bail as per the order of committee constituted under the orders of Hon'ble Supreme Court his bail shall be effective after the period of short term bail comes to an end.

¶15

The applicant shall be enlarged on bail on execution of personal bond without sureties till normal functioning of the courts is restored. The accused will furnish sureties to the satisfaction of the court below within a month after normal functioning of the courts are restored. In case the court below is functioning normally, this condition will not apply and the applicant shall be enlarged on bail on execution of personal bond and two sureties to the satisfaction of the court below.

¶16

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.

¶17

The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶18

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶19

Order Date :- 22.9.2020 KS

Vinay Varshney @ Bittu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinay Varshney @ Bittu 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

Vikki Singh @ Vijay Singh Vs State of U.P.

Yogendra Vs State of U.P.

Mahesh Dayal Vs State of Up

Sonu Jatav Vs State of U.P.

Mohd. Arif Vs State of U.P.

Ram Nagina Vs State of U.P.