Allowed

Shashikant Singh v. Union of India and Another

Allahabad HC9 Jun 2021BAIL/45536/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court granted bail to the applicant, who had been in detention since 2015 in a narcotics case. Despite prior rejections, the court considered the larger mandate of Article 21 and the unexpedited trial, allowing bail subject to strict conditions.

What did the court decide?

Release of applicant on personal bond and two sureties of Rs. 2 Lakhs each before the concerned court below.

Shashikant Singh Vs Union of India and Another — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 67

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 45536 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Shashikant Singh Opposite Party :- Union Of India And Another Counsel for Applicant :- K.S. Tiwari,Vivek Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- Ashish Pandey,G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard Sri K.S. Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ashish Pandey, learned counsel for the opposite party, Sri Sanjay Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

This is the third bail application of the applicant. The earlier bail applications of the applicant have been rejected by this Court vide orders dated 6.4.2017 and 23.01.2019, with a direction to the concerned court below to expedite the trial within a period of six months, but the same has not been expedited as yet.

¶7

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. 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. Further there is also no compliance of Section 42 and 51 of the N.D.P.S. Act. It is further contended that applicant is languishing in jail since 12.12.2015, and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the opposite party have vehemently opposed the bail prayer of the applicant without disputing the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶9

Considering the fact and circumstances of the case, Detention of the applicant who is in detention since 12.12.2015, and due to present situation prevailing in the State, it is not possible to conclude the trial expeditiously, 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- Shashikant Singh, involved in Special Criminal Case No. 7 of 2016, NCB Case No. 5 of 2015, under sections- 8/20/27A/29 and 60 (3) of N.D.P.S. Act, 1985, Police Station - Kokhraj, District- Kaushambi, be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of Rupees Two Lakhs each (one should be of a family member) before the concerned court below subject to following conditions:-

¶11

(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.

¶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

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

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

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

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

Order Date :- 9.6.2021 ssm

Shashikant Singh v. Union of India and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shashikant Singh v. Union of India and Another

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

Javed Vs State of U.P.

Dildar Vs State of U.P.

Tinku @ Sunil Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Arbaaz Vs State of U.P. and Another

Umesh Singh Vs State of U.P.

Mannu Yadav Vs State of U.P.