Allowed

Munesh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC23 Nov 2021BAIL/18673/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed a bail application regarding an NDPS charge. Addressing allegations of false recovery and procedural violations, the judge found merit in the submissions and granted bail considering jail overcrowding during the pandemic. Conditions were imposed to prevent tampering.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail under personal bond and two sureties on furnishing sureties to the satisfaction of the court below.

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

¶1

Court No. - 66

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 18673 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Munesh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Arun Kumar Sharma,Lovekush Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Pradeep Tiwari, learned counsel holding brief of Sri Lovekush Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Rajesh Kumar Mishra, learned brief holder for the State.

¶6

A first information report was lodged against the applicant as Case Crime No. 0084 of 2021 at Police Station-Chhibramu District-Kannauj on 14.02.2021 under Section 8/21 of the NDPS Act.

¶7

The bail application of the applicant was rejected by learned Additional Sessions Judge/ F.T.C Court No. 2 Kannuj on 23.02.2021.

¶8

The applicant is in jail since 12.02.2021, pursuant to the said F.I.R.

¶9

Sri Pradeep Tiwari, learned counsel holding brief of Sri Lovekush Kumar Mishra, learned counsel

¶10

for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. False recovery of 510gram ganja has been shown from the applicant. The weight of recovered substance as stated in the F.I.R. is unreliable as accurate scientific instruments were not used for weighment. The recovery was made in violation of Section 42 read with Section 50 of the NDPS Act. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. No forensic science laboratory report has been submitted which confirms that the substance allegedly recovered is prohibited under the NDPS Act. Learned counsel for the applicant has also explained the criminal history. Lastly it is submitted by Sri Pradeep Tiwari, learned counsel holding brief of Sri Lovekush Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant shall not abscond, and will fully cooperate in the criminal law proceedings. The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence nor influence the witnesses in any manner.

¶11

Sri Rajesh Kumar Mishra, learned brief holder for the State 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 Pradeep Tiwari, learned counsel holding brief of Sri Lovekush Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and hold 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- Munesh be released on bail in Case Crime No.84 of 2021 at Police StationChhibramu District-Kannauj under Section 8/21 of the NDPS Act, on his 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 will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶17

(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness.

¶18

(iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶19

(iv) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶20

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶21

Order Date :- 23.11.2021 Nadeem

Munesh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Munesh 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

Vikas Hawaldar Vs State of U.P.

Nittar @ Netrapal Vs State of U.P.

Sarfaraz @ oni Vs State of U.P.

Suhail Vs State of U.P.

Shivnath Vs State of U.P. and Another

Jeetu @ Jitendra Vs State of U.P.