Allowed

Himanshu v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC4 Jan 2021BAIL/48504/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail to the applicant charged under the N.D.P.S. Act. On behalf of the defense, it was submitted that mandatory procedural safeguards under Sections 50, 51, and 52 of the N.D.P.S. Act were not complied with. No independent witness corroborated the incident, and the applicant had no criminal history.

What did the court decide?

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

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

¶1

Court No. - 69

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 48504 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Himanshu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ramesh Kumar Pandey 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

1250 Grams of Charas is alleged to have been recovered from the possession of the applicant. 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 1.11.2020, 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- Himanshu , involved in Case Crime No. 508 of 2020, under Section- 8/20 N.D.P.S. Act, Police Station- Nauchandi, District Meerut, 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 :- 4.1.2021 Rmk.

Himanshu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Himanshu 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

Tarun Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Jai Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Adityadev Singh Vs State of U P and 2 Others

Arshad Vs State of U.P.

Kartik Sharma Vs State of U.P.

Salman Vs State of U.P.