Allowed

Sharukh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC12 Dec 2022BAIL/34008/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Hon'ble Shiv Shanker Prasad, J. granted bail to the applicant in a Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act case subject to furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties and specific conditions regarding appearance in court and non-application for adjournments.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted on personal bond and two local sureties subject to conditions regarding court attendance and non-adjudication of merits.

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

¶1

Court No. - 90

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34008 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Shahrukh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Uday Bhan Mishra,Ajai Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shiv Shanker Prasad,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant in Court today is taken on record.

¶6

Heard the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned counsel for the State as well as perused the material on record.

¶7

The present bail application has been filed by the applicantShahrukh with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.0411 of 2022, under Sections 21/22 N.D.P.S. Act, Police Station-Kotwali, District-Mathura, during the pendency of the trial.

¶8

The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present first information report lodged by the Police is nothing but a bundle of lie and the same has been lodged only for exploiting the applicant by indulging his name in a fake, false and frivolous case. The entire prosecution story as unfolded in the first information report is absolutely a self-made story projected by the informant. It is next argued that the alleged recovery of 105 alprazolam is planted one by the Police and the same is a little above to the commercial quantity. There is also no independent of public witness from the which it is established that the applicant is involved in the commission of the alleged offence. Compliance of Section 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act has also not been made. The applicant has one criminal history except the present one but the same has satisfactorily been explained in the supplementary affidavit filed today in the Court. It is next contended that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. The applicant is in jail since 30th June, 2022.

¶9

Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but he could not dispute the factual submissions as urged by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶10

Considering the nature of the offence, material/evidence brought on record, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties as well as the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Versus State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 , let the

¶11

applicant involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:-

¶12

(i) 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. 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

(ii) 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 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶14

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

¶15

(iv) 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 absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶16

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

¶17

(Shiv Shanker Prasad, J.)

¶18

Order Date :- 12.12.2022

¶19

Sushil/-

¶20

Digitally signed by SUSHIL KUMAR SINGH Date: 2022.12.14 10:26:35 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sharukh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sharukh 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

Chhotu Vs State of U.P.

Sonu Vs State of U.P.

Arvind Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Gautam Srivastava Alias Gattu Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Pradeep @ Lalla Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt. Babita Sharma Vs State of U.P.and 3 Others