Allowed

Khurshida Begum v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC9 Jun 2021BAIL/17490/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment grants bail to the applicant Khurshida Begum accused under the NDPS Act. The court found merit in the submission of false implication and unreliable recovery, allowing the application without adjudging the merits of the case.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions of appearance and non-tampering.

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

¶1

Court No. - 6

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 17490 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Khurshida Begum Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Kumar Srivastava,Azad Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Azad Khan, learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State through video conferencing mode.

¶6

A first information report was lodged against the applicant as Case Crime No.0018 of 2021 at Police StationMutthiganj District-Prayagraj on 09.02.2021 under Section 8/22 of the NDPS Act.

¶7

The bail application of the applicant was rejected by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.6, Allahabad on 06.03.2021.

¶8

The applicant is in jail since 09.02.2021, pursuant to the said F.I.R.

¶9

Sri Azad Khan, learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. False recovery of 12 gram smack powder has been shown from the applicant. Further even the said measurement is unreliable as accurate scientific instruments were not used for weighment. The recovery was made in violation of Section 50 of the NDPS Act. The applicant has satisfactorily explained her criminal history. Lastly it is submitted by Sri Azad Khan, learned counsel for applicant that the applicant shall not abscond, and will fully

¶10

cooperate in the criminal law proceedings. The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence nor influence the witnesses in any manner.

¶11

Learned A.G.A could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶12

Courts have taken notice of the overcrowding of jails during the current pandemic situation (Ref.: Suo Motu Writ Petition (c) No. 1/2020, Contagion of COVID 19 Virus in prisons before the Supreme Court of India) . These circumstances shall also be factored in while considering bail applications on behalf of accused persons.

¶13

I see merit in the submissions of Sri Azad Khan, learned counsel for the applicant and holds that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶14

In the light of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed.

¶15

Let the applicant- Khurshida Begum be released on bail in Case Crime No.18 of 2021 at Police Station-Mutthiganj District-Prayagraj under Section8/20 of the NDPS Act, on her furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below. The following conditions be imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶16

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

¶17

(ii) 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.

¶18

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial, the trial in order to secure his presence may issue a proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. In case the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against her, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶19

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

¶20

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

¶21

(vi) 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.

¶22

Order Date :- 9.6.2021 Nadeem Ahmad

Khurshida Begum v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Khurshida Begum 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

Suhail Vs State of U.P.

Yaseen Vs State of U.P.

Mintu Vs State of U.P.

Vijay Verma Vs State of U.P.

Mangroo Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Rashid Vs State of U.P.