Allowed

Robin @ Shitu v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC28 Apr 2022BAIL/8592/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal miscellaneous bail application under the NDPS Act, the High Court released the applicant on bail, dismissing the prosecution's reliance on Section 37 notwithstanding procedural lapses in search and seizure. Strict conditions regarding court attendance and bond compliance were imposed.

What did the court decide?

Release of the applicant on bail with personal bonds and two sureties, subject to conditions of attendance and non-abuse of liberty.

Robin @ Shitu Vs State of U.P. — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 78

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8592 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Robin @ Shitu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Dheeraj Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the accused-applicant and learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

¶6

Present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.1069 of 2021, under Sections 8/21 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (in short "N.D.P.S. Act") at Police Station Loni Border, District Ghaziabad.

¶7

Learned Counsel for the applicant submitted that earlier also applicant was implicated in several cases. However it would be appropriate to refer at this stage one case i.e. Case Crime No. 860 of 2021, under Section 307 IPC which relates to firing on police party and in which no one sustained fire arm injury. In this case applicant was granted bail on 22.10.2021. Thereafter three more cases including the present case have been slapped against the applicant. Elaborating his arguments, it is stated that after arrest in case crime no. 860 of 2021 the applicant was also implicated in case crime no. 861 of 2021 which relates to Arms Act and in the case related to theft of motorcycle i.e case crime no. 010079 of 2021 and in both the cases the applicant has been enlarged on bail vide order(s) dated 12.11.2021 and 02.11.2021, copies of the same are annexed with the supplementary affidavit. It is further submitted that in this case the recovery of 170 gm Alprazolam powder has been recovered from the possession of the applicant. It is further submitted that recovery of contraband shown from the possession of the applicant is doubtful as there is no public independent witness. It is further submitted that mandatory provisions of the Act of 1985 with regard to search and seizure has not been complied with.

¶8

It is further submitted that except this case there is no case under N.D.P.S. Act of 1985 against the applicant as such rigors of Section 37 of the Act of

¶9

1985 would not be an impediment in granting the bail to the applicant.

¶10

It is lastly submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from judicial custody or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty, terms and conditions of bail and will co-operate in the trial.

¶11

Learned A.G.A., on the basis of instructions, has opposed the prayer for bail but did not dispute the factual submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶12

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the record and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties including in relation to non-compliant of mandatory provisions and the facts related to the recovery and taking note of the fact that except the present case the applicant has not been implicated in the case related to Act of 1985, prima facie it appears that rigors of Section 37 of Act of 1985 would not be an impediment in releasing the applicant on bail and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I am of the view that a case for bail is made out.

¶13

Let the applicant- Robin @ Shitu , be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing personal bonds and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to following conditions :-

¶14

(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.

¶15

(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.

¶16

(iii) In case, the applicant misuse 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 fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in

¶17

such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶18

(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.

¶19

Any violation of above conditions will be treated misuse of bail and learned Court below will be at liberty to pass appropriate order in the matter regarding cancellation of bail.

¶20

Order Date :- 28.4.2022 Sanjeet

¶21

Digitally signed by SANJEET KUMAR YADAV Date: 2022.04.29 15:37:10 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Robin @ Shitu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Robin @ Shitu 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

Umesh Vs State of U.P.

Lalau Pal @ Mithlesh Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Moh. Jeelani Vs State of U.P.

Sarmeen Vs State of Up.

Noor Ali Vs State of U.P.

Sandeep Kumar Lodhi Vs State of U.P.