Allowed

Pramod v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC18 Oct 2022BAIL/36336/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a bail application filed by Pramod in a case involving recovery of 370gms of Diazepam. The court observed that the quantity was less than the minimum commercial quantity, no independent witnesses were present during recovery, and Section 50 of the NDPS Act was not complied with, granting bail subject to conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail by furnishing personal bond and two sureties each like amount as per court below.

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

¶1

Court No. - 79

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 36336 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Pramod Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- M.P.S. Chauhan,Ashutosh Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶5

1.Heard Sri Ashutosh Kumar Mishra, the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Arun Kumar Pandey, the learned Additional Government Advocate and perused the record.

¶6

2.The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 383 of 2022, under Sections 21/22 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Police Station Gandhi Park, District Aligarh during pendency of the trial in the Court below.

¶7

3.The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of a first information report lodged by the Sub Inspector of Police alleging that upon an information received from a mukhbir, the applicant was apprehended and from his personal search, 370 gms. Diazepam kept in a polythene was recovered from his pant.

¶8

4.In the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, it has been stated that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and he is in jail since 03-06-2022. The affidavit contains an undertaking that in case the applicant is released on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail and he will fully cooperate in the investigation.

¶9

In paragraph 10 of the affidavit the applicant's previous criminal history of two cases has been disclosed and in both of them the applicant has been granted bail and copies of the bail orders has been annexed along with the affidavit.

¶10

6.Per contra, the learned Additional Government Advocate has opposed the prayer for grant of bail but he could not dispute the aforesaid aspects of the matter.

¶11

Having regards to the aforesaid facts and submissions and particularly the fact that the quantity of Diazepam alleged to have been recovered from the applicant is less than the minimum prescribed commercial quantity; that there are no independent witnesses of the alleged recovery and that the provisions of Section 50 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 have not been complied

¶12

with during the arrest and recovery, I am prima facie of the view that the submissions made on behalf of the applicant give rise to a reasonable ground for believing that the applicant may not not be held guilty of the alleged offence. Further, there is no reason to believe that the applicant is likely to commit any offence, if he is released on bail.

¶13

8.In light of the preceding discussion and without making any observation on the merit of the case, the instant bail application is allowed.

¶14

9.Let the applicant - Pramod be released on bail in Case Crime No. 383 of 2022, under Sections 21/22 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Police Station Gandhi Park, District Aligarh on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below, subject to the following conditions:-

¶15

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

¶16

(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness.

¶17

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

¶18

(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.

¶19

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

¶20

Order Date :- 18.10.2022

¶21

pks

¶22

Digitally signed by PANKAJ KUMAR SRIVASTAVA Date: 2022.10.19 11:37:05 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Pramod v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pramod 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

Vishal Singh Vs State of U.P.

Vinay Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Shanu and Another Vs State of U.P.

Brijesh Kumar Chaurasia Vs State of U.P.

Gaurav Kumar Mandal Vs State of U.P.

Vishnu Pratap Vs State of U.P. and Another