Dismissed

Dileep Verma v. Union of India

Allahabad HC26 Aug 2022BAIL/4611/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal miscellaneous bail application, the High Court rejected the plea of Dileep Verma arrested under Sections 8/20/25/29 N.D.P.S. Act. The Court declined to grant bail given the commercial quantity involved, allegations of false implication, and the applicant's prior criminal history and pending bail in previous NDPS cases.

What did the court decide?

Bail application rejected; trial to be concluded expeditiously within one year.

Dileep Verma Vs Union of India — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Reserved on 18.08.2022

¶2

Delivered on 26.08.2022

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4611 of 2022

¶4

Applicant :- Dileep Verma Opposite Party :- Union of India Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Sajiwan Prajapati,Anjani Kumar Shahwal,Pramod Kumar Chaudhary

¶5

Counsel for Opposite Party :- Ashish Pandey

¶6

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶7

Heard Sri Anjani Kumar Shahwal, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ashish Pandey, learned counsel for the opposite party.

¶8

This bail application has been preferred by the accused-applicant, Dileep Verma, who is involved in Case Crime No.32/2021, under Sections 8/20/25/29 N.D.P.S. Act, Police Station NCB, Lucknow, District Sonbhadra.

¶9

There is allegation against the applicant and two other co-accused that they were found in possession of 450 Kg of ganja and were arrested by the team of Narcotics Control Bureau. Recovery of contraband much above the commercial quantity has been made from them.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He was only a passenger in the vehicle from where the alleged recovery has been shown. The vehicle was being driven by co-accused, Balwant Verma and the applicant along with Sandeep Verma was travelling therein. The applicant has no concern with the alleged recovery. There is no public witness of recovery made from the applicant.

¶11

Sri Ashish Pandey, learned counsel for the NCB, has vehemently opposed the bail application. He has submitted the applicant has disclosed criminal history of 34 cases in his bail application himself. He has earlier been implicated in two cases for committing offence under NDPS Act in the year 2006 and he is on bail in the aforesaid cases. He is habitual offender and not entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶12

After hearing the rival contentions, considering the material on record this court does not finds any ground for enlarging the applicant on bail at this stage.

¶13

The bail application is accordingly rejected.

¶14

The trial court is directed to conclude the trial against the applicant as expeditiously as possible, preferable within a period of one year.

¶15

Order Date :- 26.08.2022 SS

¶16

2 of 2

¶17

Digitally signed by SURENDAR SINGH NARANG Date: 2022.08.26 11:38:10 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Dileep Verma v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dileep Verma v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Namit Jain Vs State of U.P.

Pramod Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Sachin Vs State of U.P.

Rajkishore Dwivedi Vs State of Up through Secretary Home U.P. Lucknow

Mohit Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P. through Secretary Home

Raj Kumar Dangi Vs Union of India and Another