Allowed

Kishan Yadav v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC30 Jul 2021BAIL/26731/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court allowed bail to Kishan Yadav, a labour in a godown where narcotic tablets were recovered, ruling he is entitled to release on furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties subject to standard bail conditions, noting the main owner co-accused was already granted bail.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail by furnishing personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount.

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

¶1

Court No. - 66

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 26731 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Kishan Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Atul Singh,Alok Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ali Zamin,J.

¶5

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

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.106 of 2021, under Sections 8, 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, P.S. Rohaniya, District Varanasi.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is a labour in the godown of Pradeep Kumar Jaiswal, who is owner of the godown from where narcotic tablets were recovered. He further submits that the applicant has not committed the alleged offence. He has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is also submitted that the co-accused Pradeep Kumar Jaiswal has been granted bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 29.07.2021 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.21730 of 2021, therefore, the applicant is also entitled for bail. There is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and, in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. It is next contended that there is no criminal history of the applicant and is languishing in jail since 22.02.2021.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, enlargement of co-accused on bail, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, the applicant is entitled for bail, let the applicant- Kishan Yadav involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions :-

¶10

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he

¶11

will not tamper with the evidence and will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and will cooperate with the trial. The applicant 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.

¶12

(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.

¶13

(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.

¶14

(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.

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

Order Date :- 30.7.2021 Jitendra

Kishan Yadav v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kishan Yadav 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jitendra Kumar Pandey Vs State of U.P.

Chandra Jeet Chauhan Vs State of U.P.

Pavitra Singh Vs State of U.P.

Sudama Chauhan Vs State of U.P.

Pappu @ Ram Pratap and Another Vs State of U.P.

Raj Bahadur Vs State of U.P.