Vinod Yadav @ Alok Vs State of U.P.

Court No. - 64

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35015 of 2021

Applicant :- Vinod Yadav @ Alok Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pradeep Kumar,Kalp Dev Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ram Krishna Gautam,J.

¶5

Heard over bail application moved by the applicant, Vinod Yadav @ Alok, in Case Crime No. 211 of 2021, under Sections8/20 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Police Station-Kotwali, District-Azamgarh.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA representing the State. Perused the record.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant is innocent; he has been falsely implicated in this very case crime number and is languishing in jail since 13.07.2021; he is of two criminal antecedents, wherein he is on bail and same has been explained in the rejoinder affidavit; but, none of them are of NDPS Act; it is first case of NDPS Act which is planted one; the alleged recovery of 46 Kilogram 'Ganja' is with no compliance of provisions of Section 50 of NDPS Act and there is no independent public witness of above recovery; it is a false implication; there is no likelihood of applicant's fleeing from course of justice or tempering with evidence in case of release on bail; hence bail has been prayed for.

¶8

Learned AGA has vehemently opposed bail but could not oppose this fact that the applicant is of no criminal antecedent of NDPS Act.

¶9

Having heard learned counsel for both the parties, gone through the material placed on record and considering the nature of accusations, severity of the punishment in the case of conviction, the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 , but without commenting on the merits of the case, a case for bail is made out, accordingly allowed.

¶10

Let the applicant, Vinod Yadav @ Alok , involved in above mentioned case crime number be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:

¶11

The applicant will not tamper with the evidence.

¶12

The applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity.

¶13

The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and co-operate in the trial.

¶14

The applicant will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the trial court unless his personal appearance is exempted through counsel by the court concerned.

¶15

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court, Allahabad.

¶16

The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by counsel of the party concerned.

¶17

The concerned Court/ Authority/ Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court, Allahabad, and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶18

In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the court below will be at liberty to proceed to cancel his bail.

¶19

Order Date :- 28.1.2022 Deepak/

Vinod Yadav @ Alok v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinod Yadav @ Alok v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Praveen @ Praveen Vs State of U.P.

Shah Alam Vs State of U.P.

Aarif @ Kallu Vs State of U.P. through Secretary Home at Lucknow

Sanju Saini Vs State of U.P.

Arvind Vs State of U.P.

Arman Vs State of U.P.