Allowed

Manvendra Patel @ Ranu Patel v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC6 Dec 2021BAIL/47380/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court allowed bail to Manvendra Patel in a case involvingIPC 269, 270 (pollution/overdosing) and Drugs and Cosmetics Act. The court noted lack of independent witnesses, alleged planting of evidence, and jail overcrowding due to COVID-19 as grounds for bail.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in like amounts subject to conditions not to tamper with evidence, influence witnesses, and appear before the trial court.

Manvendra Patel @ Ranu Patel Vs State of U.P. — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 66

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 47380 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Manvendra Patel @ Ranu Patel Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Manish Kumar Niranjan,Bharat Garg,Jai Singh Parihar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶5

Heard Shri Jai Singh Parihar, learned counsel for the applicant, and learned AGA for the State.

¶6

A first information report was lodged as Case Crime No.142 of 2021 at Police Station-Navabad, DistrictJhansi under Sections 269, 270, 188, 34, 419, 420 I.P.C. Sections 17(a), 17(b), 18(a), 18(c) and 27 of Drugs and Cosmetics Act and Sections 52, 53 of Disaster Management Act and Section 3(1) Epidemic (Amendment) Ordinance 2020.

¶7

The bail application of the applicant was rejected by learned Special Judge (NDPS Act), Additional Sessions Judge(POCSO Act), Jhansi on 23.09.2021.

¶8

The applicant is in jail since 01.05.2021, pursuant to the said F.I.R.

¶9

Shri Jai Singh Parihar, learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. As per the prosecution case one remdesivir injection, mobile and Rs. 30,000/- were recovered from the applicant. Recovered items were

¶10

planted on the person of the applicant to frame him in the instant case to show proficiency of police investigators. There is no independent witness or public witness to the alleged recovery.Apart from the instant case, the applicant does not have any criminal history. Learned counsel for the applicant claims congruency in role with co-accused person and seeks parity in relief with co-accused namely Sachin Prajapati, who has been granted bail by the this Court on 13.09.2021 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 33577 of 2021. Lastly it is contended by the learned counsel for applicant that the applicant shall not abscond and will fully cooperate in the criminal law proceedings. The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence nor influence the witnesses in any manner.

¶11

Shri Vikas Sahai, learned AGA for the State could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. Learned AGA does not dispute the fact that the applicant does not have any criminal history.

¶12

Courts have taken notice of the overcrowding of jails during the current pandemic situation (Ref.: Suo 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.

¶13

I see merit in the submissions of the learned counsel for the applicant and hold that the applicant is entitled to be

¶14

enlarged on bail.

¶15

In the light of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed.

¶16

Let the applicant -Manvendra Patel @ Ranu Patel involved in Case Crime No.142 of 2021 at Police Station-Navabad, District-Jhansi under Sections 269, 270, 188, 34, 419, 420 I.P.C. Sections 17(a), 17(b), 18(a), 18(c) and 27 of Drugs and Cosmetics Act and Sections 52, 53 of Disaster Management Act and Section 3(1) Epidemic (Amendment) Ordinance 2020 be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions.

¶17

The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶18

The applicant will not influence any witness.

¶19

The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶20

The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶21

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation

¶22

application before this Court.

¶23

Order Date :- 6.12.2021 Dhananjai

Manvendra Patel @ Ranu Patel v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manvendra Patel @ Ranu Patel 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

Irfan Vs State of Up

Banti Sahu @ Shivendra Vs State of U.P. and Another

Pramod Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Mujammil Vs State of U.P.

Jabbar Vs State of U.P.

Vishwajeet Dev @ Visnu Vs State of U.P.