Allowed

Sameer v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC4 Jan 2021BAIL/38524/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court allowed the bail application of the applicant Sameer in a case involving the possession of Ganja below commercial quantity. The court held that the applicant has made out a fit case for bail and directed his release on personal bond and two sureties with specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

The applicant Sameer was released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount.

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

¶1

Court No. - 72

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 38524 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Sameer Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ankit Agarval Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State and perused the record of the case.

¶6

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 310 of 2020, under Section 8/20 of N.D.P.S. Act, police station Khurja Dehat, district Bulandshahr during the pendency of trial.

¶7

It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that 19 kg and 200 gms of Ganja has been recovered on the joint possession of the applicant and co-accused Fajal, which is below commercial quantity, therefore, provisions of section 37 of N.D.P.S. Act are not attracted. It is next submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that co-accused Fajal has been granted bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 18.11.2020 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 38300 of 2020. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the case of present applicant is similar to that of co-accused Fajal, therefore, the applicant is also entitled to be released on bail on the ground of parity. There is no prospect of trial of the present case being concluded in near future due to heavy dockets. The applicant has no criminal history to his credit. The applicant is languishing in jail since 10.09.2020 and in case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶8

Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage therefore, the applicant does not deserve any indulgence. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will misuse the liberty of bail.

¶9

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the

¶10

parties, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a fit case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed.

¶11

Let the applicant Sameer, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶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

(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.

¶16

(v) The applicant shall file computer generated copy of this order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.

¶17

(vi) The computer generated copy of this order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.

¶18

(vii) 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.

¶19

It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the

¶20

purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order.

¶21

Order Date :- 4.1.2021 Sazia

Sameer v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sameer 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

Mahendra Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Chandan Sahni Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Dinesh Singh @ Virendra Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Akhil Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Ayyub Vs State of U.P.

Vijay Gupta Vs State of U.P.