Allowed

Waseem v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC7 Sept 2021BAIL/21138/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court granted bail to the applicant accused of Narco-DPS offences. Relying on jail overcrowding due to the pandemic and the reformative theory of punishment under Article 21, the court ordered release on personal and surety bonds, subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties (one being a family member) in the like amount, subject to conditions regarding attendance, non-tampering with w

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

¶1

Court No. - 71

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 21138 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Waseem Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Krishna Kant Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA, appearing for the State and perused the material brought on record.

¶6

It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that 550 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, 50, 52 and 57 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 22.02.2021. Criminal history of the applicant has properly been explained in para 12 to the affidavit filed in support of bail application.

¶7

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer.

¶8

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.

¶9

Having heard the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment, and larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 2 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.

¶10

Let applicant- Waseem , be released on bail in Case Crime No. 50 of 2021, under Sections- 8/21 Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, Police Station- Azim Nagar, District- Rampur, on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties (One should be of a family member) each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

¶11

The applicant will attend and co-operate the trial proceedings pending before the court concerned on the date fixed after release.

¶12

He will not tamper with the witnesses.

¶13

He will not indulge in any illegal activities during the bail period.

¶14

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the

¶15

court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶16

It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.

¶17

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

¶18

The trial court is directed to expedite the trial of the present case and conclude the same expeditiously preferably within a period of six months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, if there is no legal impediment.

¶19

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

¶20

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

¶21

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 :- 7.9.2021 Arti

Waseem v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Waseem 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

Harish Vs State of U.P.

Pradeep Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Aniruddh Singh Vs State of U.P.

Mahendra Sharma Vs State of U.P.

Sarvesh Kumar Nishad Vs State of U.P.

Dinesh Kumar Vs State of U.P.