Allowed

Pappu Sharma v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC8 Dec 2022BAIL/37230/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed bail to the applicant in a case registered under Sections 8/20 NDPS Act, 1985. The judgment highlighted that the search was conducted without a Magistrate and the seized quantity fell below the commercial minimum, entitling the applicant to release on personal bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Release of the applicant on bail in Crime No. 356/2022 on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties.

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

¶1

Court No. - 79

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 37230 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Pappu Sharma Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Garun Pal Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶5

1.Heard Sri Garun Pal Singh, the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ghanshyam Mishra, the learned State Counsel and perused the record.

¶6

2.The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 356 of 2022, under Sections 8/20 Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Police Station Vrindavan, District Mathura.

¶7

3.The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an FIR lodged on 29.07.2022 by the excise Inspector, alleging that on the basis of an information received from a Mukhbir and during his personal search, 27 quarters of illicit country liquor was recovered being carried by him and another bag being carried by the applicant and 3.800 kg. Ganja was recovered.

¶8

4.It has been averred in the affidavit filed in support of the bail application that the applicant is an innocent person, he has been falsely implicated in the case, he is having no previous criminal history and he is in jail since 29.07.2022. It has also been stated in the affidavit that there is no possibility of the applicant tampering with any evidence and in such circumstances, the applicant is entitled for bail. It is also stated in the affidavit that the applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail and he will fully cooperate in the investigation.

¶9

5.The applicant's criminal history of seven cases has been explained in paragraph-17 of the affidavit, in all of which the applicant has been granted bail.

¶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

7.Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that although the personal search of the applicant was carried out, the same has not been

¶12

done in presence of a Magistrate and also keeping in view the fact that the quantity of the substance recovered falls below the minimum prescribed commercial quantity, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in the aforesaid case.

¶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 Pappu Sharma be released on bail in Case Crime No. 356 of 2022, under Sections 8/20 Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Police Station Vrindavan, District Mathura 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 :- 8.12.2022 Ashish Pd.

¶21

Digitally signed by ASHISH PRASAD Date: 2022.12.12 17:57:22 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Pappu Sharma v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pappu Sharma 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

Rahul Vs State of U.P.

Rajendra Patel Vs State of U.P.

Faruk Ahmad Vs State of U.P.

Shrinath Maurya Vs State of U.P.

Mahendra Kumar Seth Vs State of U.P.

Anoop Shukla Vs State of U.P.