Allowed

Mursaleem v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC18 Jan 2021BAIL/3018/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court granted bail in a Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances case where the applicant alleged false implication and non-compliance with mandatory procedural safeguards like Sections 50, 51, and 52 of the N.D.P.S. Act, noting the recovery was less than commercial quantity.

What did the court decide?

Enlargement on bail by executing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court.

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

¶1

Court No. - 69

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3018 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Mursaleem Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Pathak Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

7 Grams Smack is alleged to have been recovered from the possession of the applicant which is less than the commercial quantity. The applicant is innocent, he has not committed the alleged offence, but he has been falsely implicated in the present case. There is no compliance of mandatory provision of Sections 50, 51 and 52 of the N.D.P.S. Act and there is no independent witness of the incident. The applicant has no criminal history. It is next submitted that there is also no possibility of applicant either fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. Applicant who is in jail since 6.11.2020, undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty, if granted.

¶7

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶8

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also perusing the material on record, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, let the applicant- Mursaleem , involved in Case Crime No. 407 of 2020, under Section- 8/21 N.D.P.S. Act, Police Station- Sarsawa, District Saharanpur, be enlarged on bail on his executing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned. It is further provided that this bail order available on the official website of the High Court will be taken to be the authentic one and certified copy shall be submitted before that court concerned as soon as it is issued.

¶9

This bail order would be subject to the fulfilment of following conditions:-

¶10

The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶11

The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶12

The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶13

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 229A of the Indian Penal Code;

¶14

In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail 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

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 default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶16

In case the applicant has been enlarged on short term bail as per the order of committee constituted under the orders of Hon'ble Supreme Court his bail shall be effective after the period of short term bail comes to an end.

¶17

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

¶18

Order Date :- 18.1.2021 Rmk.

Mursaleem v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mursaleem 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Saleem and Another Vs State of U.P.

Lokendra Vs State of U.P.

Budhiram Vs State of U.P.

Basant Beldar and Another Vs State of U.P.

Anar Kali Vs State of U.P.

Vikki Vs State of U.P. and Another