Allowed

Aniruddh Singh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC6 Sept 2021BAIL/21434/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail to the applicant in a narcotics case, noting alleged police misconduct regarding recovery and lack of procedural compliance. Considering jail overcrowding during the pandemic and the nature of evidence, the court directed the trial court to expedite proceedings within six months.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties subject to specified conditions including appearance and undertaking against seeking adjournments.

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

¶1

Court No. - 71

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 21434 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Aniruddh Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vinay Kumar,Sanjeev Kumar Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

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

¶6

It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. The applicant has no concern with the present case. It is next contended that contraband substance, i.e. Alprazolam, is said to have been recovered from the possession of the applicant. As a matter of fact no such recovery has been made from the applicant. The police has planted false recovery. It is next contended that factum of recovery has not been supported by any independent or public witness to support the prosecution version. It is also contended that mandatory provisions enumerated under section 50, 52, 52A and 57 of N.D.P.S. Act has not been complied with. It is further contended that applicant is languishing in jail since 19.09.2019. The criminal history of the applicant has been properly explained in paragraph 13 of the affidavit filed in support of instant bail application along with the bail orders. It is lastly contended that in case applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial.

¶7

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail prayer of the applicant and submitted that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre-trial stage. However, learned AGA failed to dispute the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶8

Courts have taken notice of overcrowding of jails during the current pandemic situation (Ref: Sue, 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

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the record of the case, prevailing situation in the State and also that trial is not likely to be heard in near future, 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 and reformative theory of punishment and also considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 , without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.

¶10

Let applicant- Aniruddh Singh, involved in Case Crime No. 427 of 2019, under section- 21/22 of N.D.P.S. Act, Police Station - G.R.P. Kanpur

¶11

Nagar, District- Kanpur Nagar, be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶12

(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.

¶13

(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.

¶14

(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.

¶15

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.

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

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.

¶21

Order Date :- 6.9.2021 ssm

Aniruddh Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aniruddh Singh 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

Sarmeen Vs State of U.P.

Dilshad Vs State of U.P.

Eidu Vs State of U.P.

Javed Vs State of U.P.

Harish Vs State of U.P.

Pradeep Kumar Vs State of U.P.