Allowed

Shivam v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC1 Dec 2022BAIL/37867/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court granted bail to the applicant in a narcotics case involving Sections 8 and 22 of the N.D.P.S. Act. The applicant submitted that evidence was planted and no FSL report or independent witnesses existed, but they also failed to contest these facts. The court noted these factual claims and granted bail via personal bond and sureties, imposing conditions regarding court attendance to prevent

What did the court decide?

Released on bail making a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount subject to specific conditions.

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

¶1

Court No. - 90

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 37867 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Shivam Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mukesh Kumar,Amit Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shiv Shanker Prasad,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant- Shivam with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 0116 of 2022, under Sections 8/22 N.D.P.S. Act, Police Station-Sahawar, District- Kasganj, during the pendency of the trial.

¶7

It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is next submitted that the applicant has not committed any offence as alleged in the first information report. It is further submitted that 530 Tablets (Iprasafe 0.5 m.g.), 1800 Tablets (Becalm 0.5 m.g.) and 200 Injections (Meridol 100 m.g.) are alleged to have been recovered from the possession of the applicant, but the same is planted by the police against the applicant as also there is no independent or public witness of the said alleged recovery. It is also submitted that the aforesaid alleged recovered contraband against the applicant is below the commercial quantity. There is no compliance of Sections 50 and 52 of the N.D.P.S. Act and also no report of Forensic Science Laboratory on the basis of which it can be said that the alleged recovered item was a contraband. It is further submitted that the applicant has no criminal history. 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 17.05.2022.

¶8

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.

¶9

Considering the nature of the offence, provision for initiation of cases and release of the accused, complicity of the accused,

¶10

severity of punishment as well as the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, let the 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:-

¶11

(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.

¶12

(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.

¶13

(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.

¶14

(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.

¶15

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.

¶16

Order Date :- 1.12.2022 SK Srivastava

¶17

Digitally signed by SAILESH KUMAR SRIVASTAVA Date: 2022.12.02 17:02:51 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shivam v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shivam 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

Shakeel Vs State of U.P.

Amitesh Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Rohit Alias Lalla Vs State of U.P.

Belal Vs State of U.P.

Monu Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P.

Shivam Yadav Vs State of U.P.