Allowed

Akram v. State of U.P. Thru Secy. Home Lucknow

Allahabad HC26 Sept 2022/2291/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge court allowed bail to applicant in NDPS case. No contraband recovered from applicant; implicated solely on co-accused confessions. Criminal history explained. Bail granted with sureties and specific attendance conditions.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail with personal bond and two sureties; conditions to prevent witness tampering and ensure attendance for case opening, framing of charge, and Section 313 statement.

Akram Vs State of U.P. Thru Secy. Home Lucknow — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 15

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2291 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Akram Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru Secy. Home Lucknow Counsel for Applicant :- Devendra Pratap Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ajay Singh Tomar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release the applicant on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 327 of 2020, under Section 8/18/23 (C) N.D.P.S. Act, P.S.- Bachrawan, District - Raebareli.

¶7

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. As per allegation 5 kilogram of opium has been shown from the possession of the other coaccused persons and name of the present applicant has come into light on the confessional statement of co-accused persons. He further submits that there are four cases criminal history against the applicant wherein also the name of the present applicant has come into light on the confessional statement of co-accused persons and in all those cases applicant has been enlarged on bail. The applicant is languishing in jail since 21.08.2022. In case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer of bail but he could not dispute the fact that there is no recovery from the accused applicant and criminal history of the applicant has been explained aforesaid.

¶9

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of record, it is evident that no contraband substance has been recovered from the possession of the present applicant and his name came into light on the confessional statement of coaccused persons; further criminal history of the applicant has been explained aforesaid, coupled with the fact that he is languishing in jail since 21.08.2022, thus without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.

¶10

Let the applicant- Akram involved in the aforementioned crime

¶11

be released on bail, on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned, with the following conditions:-

¶12

(1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial;

¶13

(2) 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. He 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

(3) 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.; and

¶15

(4) 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, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶17

It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case.

¶18

Order Date :- 26.9.2022 Ujjawal

¶19

Digitally signed by UJJAWAL PARJAPATI Date: 2022.09.29 10:37:21 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Akram v. State of U.P. Thru Secy. Home Lucknow

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Akram v. State of U.P. Thru Secy. Home Lucknow

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

Chunnu Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru.Prin.Secy.Dept. of Home

Dharnidhar Upadhyay Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Afroz Khan Alias Chunnu Vs State of U.P.

Anil Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. Home Lucknow

Sandeep Pasi @ Chirraiya Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Jay Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.