Allowed

Vipin Kumar Yadav v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC21 Oct 2022BAIL/40776/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court allowed bail application under NDPS Act. Judge found prima facie grounds not to hold applicant guilty as search was conducted without Gazetted Officer, quantity details missing, and no minimum quantity alleged. Bail granted with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail with personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions to not tamper with evidence or influence witnesses.

Vipin Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P. — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 79

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 40776 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Vipin Kumar Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vinod Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶5

1.Heard Sri Vinod Kumar Yadav, 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. 214 of 2022, under Sections 8/22 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Police Station Shahganj, District Jaunpur, 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 a Sub Inspector of Police alleging that on the basis of an information received from a mukhbir the applicant was arrested and 45 gms intoxicating powder was recovered from the pocket of pants worn by the applicant during his personal search.

¶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 23-08-2022.

¶9

The applicant's criminal history has been disclosed in paragraph nos.15 and 16 filed in support of the bail application and in paragraph nos. 3, 4 and 5 of the Supplementary Affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant.

¶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 regard to the aforesaid facts and submissions and particularly the fact that the substance recovered from the pocket of pants during his personal search and the search has not been conducted in the presence of any Gazetted Officer; that there is no mention of the name of the substance recovered from the applicant and also keeping in view the fact that there is no allegation that the quantity recovered from the applicant

¶12

exceeds the minimum quantity, 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

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

¶14

10.Let the applicant - Vipin Kumar Yadav be released on bail in Case Crime No. 214 of 2022, under Sections 8/22 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Police Station Shahganj, District Jaunpur 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

11.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 :- 21.10.2022

¶21

pks

¶22

Digitally signed by PANKAJ KUMAR SRIVASTAVA Date: 2022.10.21 16:00:56 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Vipin Kumar Yadav v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vipin Kumar Yadav 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

Pappu Shah Vs State of U.P.

Maharban Vs State of U.P.

Shakeel Vs State of U.P.

Anita Devi and 3 Others Vs State of U.P.

Rajesh Pal Vs State of U.P.

Shivam Shakya Vs State of U.P.