Allowed

Bhola Dom v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC8 Jul 2022BAIL/20374/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under the N.D.P.S. Act, the High Court granted bail to the accused primarily due to the police failure to comply with Section 50 of the Act during recovery of seized drugs. The court allowed the release on personal bond and local sureties without expressing an opinion on the merits of the case.

What did the court decide?

Release of applicant on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties subject to specific conditions regarding court attendance and conduct.

Bhola Dom Vs State of U.P. — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 77

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 20374 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Bhola Dom Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sarvagya Singh,Rajendra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the entire record.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No. 73 of 2021, under Sections 8/22 of the N.D.P.S. Act, Police Station - G.R.P. Cantt., District - Varanasi with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.

¶7

In support of the prayer of bail the contention as raised at the Bar by learned counsel for the applicant is that applicant-accused is quite innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted by the learned counsel for applicant that there is no compliance by the police of the provisions of Section 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act while making recovery of 110 grams of Alprazolam powder from the present accused. The said recovery is although a little above the commercial quantity, but the said recovery appears to be false as there is no public witness of the alleged recovery. Lastly, it is argued that the applicant is in jail since 01.06.2022 and that in case applicant is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail.

¶9

Keeping in view the submission of learned counsel for the parties, taking into consideration that the compliance of provisions of Section 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act were not made by the police at the time of making the alleged recovery, considering the period of detention of the applicant and considering all other attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, at this stage, prima facie, a case for bail has been made out.

¶10

The prayer for bail is granted. The application is allowed.

¶11

Let applicant Bhola Dom involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties to the satisfaction of court concerned subject to the following conditions:-

¶12

(1). The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and 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;

¶13

(2). 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

¶14

Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code;

¶15

(3). 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 may initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

(4). 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.

¶17

Order Date :- 8.7.2022 LBY

¶18

Digitally signed by LAL BAHADUR YADAV Date: 2022.07.08 16:36:57 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Bhola Dom v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhola Dom 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

Deepu Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Manjeet Prajapati Vs State of U.P.

Amar Singh Vs State of U.P.

Dinesh @ Keka Vs State of U.P.

Wamik Vs State of U.P.

Salman Alias Sultan Vs State of U.P.