Allowed

Shiv Kumar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC20 May 2022BAIL/18851/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed a bail application filed under the NDPS Act. The Single Judge found merit in the applicant's submission regarding violations of mandatory provisions of Sections 42 and 50, including lack of forensic report and independent witnesses to recovery.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail with personal bond and two sureties on conditions of not tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses.

Shiv Kumar Vs State of U.P. — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 68

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 18851 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Shiv Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- M.P.S. Chauhan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶5

By means of this bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No.174 of 2021 at Police Station-Kotwali Nagar, District-Aligarh under Section 21/22 of the N.D.P.S. Act. The applicant is in jail since 01.07.2021.

¶6

The bail application of the applicant was rejected by learned Special Judge (N.D.P.S. Act)/Additional District and Sessions Judge, Aligarh on 17.02.2022.

¶7

Sri M. P. S. Chauhan, learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. 500 gram Diazepam was planted on the applicant to frame him in the instant case to burnish the credentials of the police investigators. The weight of the recovered substance is not more than the notified commercial quantity as 500 gram under the NDPS Act. No forensic science laboratory report has been submitted which confirms that the substance allegedly recovered is prohibited under the NDPS Act. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. The mandatory provisions of Section 42 and Section 50 of

¶8

the NDPS Act have been violated.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has explained the criminal history of the applicant and contends that the applicant was falsely implicated in the said case. The criminal case does not depict commission of any heinous crime by the applicant and has no bearing on the instant case. The applicant is not a flight risk and there is no possibility of his influencing witnesses, tampering with the evidence or reoffending.

¶10

Shri Indra Prakash Srivastava, learned A.G.A could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. Learned AGA does not contest the criminal history of the applicant as disclosed in the bail application.

¶11

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

¶12

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

¶13

Let the applicant- Shiv Kumar 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 subject to following conditions.

¶14

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶15

(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness.

¶16

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

¶17

(iv) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make 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.

¶18

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶19

Order Date :- 20.5.2022 Dhananjai

¶20

Digitally signed by DHANANJAI Date: 2022.05.21 15:45:14 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shiv Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shiv Kumar 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

Prem Kumar Rathor Vs State of U.P.

Satish Jogi Vs State of U.P through Its Secretary Home Up at Lucknow

Rashid Vs State of U.P.

Munna and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.

Bablu Alias Zaid Vs State of U.P.

Prashant Vs State of U.P.