Allowed

Mahesh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC16 Jun 2021BAIL/16565/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 16565 of 2021, the Allahabad High Court released the accused Mahesh on bail in a case concerning 50 grams of Alprazolam under Sections 8 and 21 of the NDPS Act. The court observed non-compliance with Section 42(2) of the NDPS Act, raised reasonable apprehension of witness tampering, and imposed specific conditions regarding adjournments and court appearance.

What did the court decide?

Release of the applicant on bail with a personal bond with two sureties, subject to conditions regarding court attendance and prohibition on adjournments.

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

¶1

Court No. - 67

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16565 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Mahesh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sandeep Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Sanjay Singh, learned A.G.A.-I appearing for the State.

¶6

It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that 50 gram contraband article, i.e., Alprazolam is said to have been recovered from the possession of the applicant. He further submits that there is no compliance of mandatory provisions of Sections 42(2) of the N.D.P.S. Act, hence the recovery is bad in the eyes of law. The applicant has no criminal history with respect to the N.D.P.S. Act. It has also been submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 17.02.2021. The applicant has no other reported criminal antecedent.

¶7

Learned A.G.A. 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 tampering of the witnesses and prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge and the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.

¶9

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case let the applicant Mahesh involved in Case Crime No. 58 of 2021, under Section 8/21 N.D.P.S. Act, Police Station Rajjabpur, District J.P.Nagar (Amroha) be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/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 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 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.

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.

¶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

Order Date :- 16.6.2021 Arti

Mahesh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahesh 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

Om Prakash @ Tyagi @ Yogi Vs State of U.P. and Another

Arman and Another Vs State of U.P.

Sonoo Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Pradeep Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Mohd. Asif Vs State of U.P.

Satendra Nishad Vs State of U.P.