Allowed

Shivam Sharma v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC14 Jul 2021BAIL/11099/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court granted bail to applicant Shivam Sharma in an NDPS case involving recovery of Bhang. Applicant released on personal bond and sureties subject to conditions regarding witness tampering, attendance, and presence during critical trial stages.

What did the court decide?

Respondent released on bail on personal bond and two sureties subject to undertaking not to tamper with evidence and conditions of attendance.

Shivam Sharma Vs State of U.P. — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 66

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11099 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Shivam Sharma Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Amir Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ali Zamin,J.

¶5

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

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.489 of 2020, under Section 8/20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, P.S. Bita-2, District Gautam Budh Nagar.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that 176.200 kgs. Bhang has been recovered from the possession of the applicant which is not covered in N.D.P.S. Act. He further submits that the co-accused Radha Kishan Pandey from whom 168.400 kgs. Ganja alleged to have been recovered, has been already granted bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 07.06.2021 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.43890 of 2020 . There is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and, in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. It is next contended that there is no previous criminal history of the applicant and is languishing in jail since 03.09.2020.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, enlargement of co-accused on bail and recovery from the possession of the applicant, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, the applicant is entitled for bail, let the applicant- Shivam Sharma involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his/her furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions :-

¶10

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he/she will not tamper with the evidence and will not

¶11

pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and will cooperate with the trial. The applicant 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.

¶12

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his/her counsel. In case of his/her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him/her 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/her 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/her, 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/her in accordance with law.

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

Order Date :- 14.7.2021 Jitendra

Shivam Sharma v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shivam Sharma 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

Jayveer Yadav and Another Vs State of U.P.

Sandeep Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Rajat Singh @ Mintu Thakur Vs State of U.P.

Rahul yadav Vs State of U.P.

Dheeru Singh Vs State of U.P.

Naseer @ Babli Vs State of U.P.