Allowed

Bhonu Yadav v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC26 Jun 2023BAIL/14490/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Cr.Misc. Bail Application filed by Bhonu Yadav in a case under Section 8/20 N.D.P.S. Act involving 250 gm Ganja recovery. The applicant argued innocence and lack of incriminating evidence. The High Court considered the gravity of the offence and circumstances, finding a case for bail made out, and enlarged the applicant on bail subject to strict conditions.

What did the court decide?

Enlarged the applicant on bail subject to execution of personal bond and two sureties and strict conditions regarding trial attendance.

Bhonu Yadav Vs State of U.P. — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:128488

¶2

Court No. - 75

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14490 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Bhonu Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sunil Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Syed Aftab Husain Rizvi,J.

¶6

Heard the learned counsel for applicant, the learned AGA for State and perused the record.

¶7

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant to enlarge him on bail in case crime no.21 of 2023 under Section 8/20 N.D.P.S. Act, P.S. Saraikhwaja, District- Jaunpur.

¶8

The learned counsel for applicant contended that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated. The alleged recovery of 250 gm Ganja is false and planted. Nothing incriminating has been recovered from the possession of the applicant, there is no public witness of the recovery. It is further contended that mandatory legal provisions of N.D.P.S. Act have not been followed. It is further contended that the criminal history of the applicant has been explained in Para No. 15 of the affidavit of the bail application. Lastly, it is contended that applicant is in jail since 01.02.2023 and he undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail. It is next submitted that there is also no possibility of applicant either fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses.

¶9

The learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that contraband Ganja has been recovered from the possession of the accused-applicant. The applicant-accused has long criminal history. If the applicant-accused released on bail, he will again indulged in criminal activities. Hence, the applicant is not entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶10

Considering the rival submissions of the parties, the nature and gravity of the offence, the quantity of the alleged recovered contraband, and all other attending facts and circumstances of the case, in view of this Court, a case for bail is made out.

¶11

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶12

Let the applicant- Bhonu Yadav involved in the aforesaid case, be enlarged on bail on his executing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

¶13

This bail order would be subject to the fulfillment of following conditions:-

¶14

The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶15

The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel.

¶16

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 default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶17

Order Date :- 26.6.2023 SP/-

¶18

Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Bhonu Yadav v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhonu 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

Ashwani Alias Soni Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Savitri Devi Vs State of U.P.

Pawan Kumar Pandey and Another Vs State of U.P. and Anothers

Tahir Ali and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.

Khurseed Ansari Vs State of U.P. and Another

Navi Mohammad Vs State of U.P. and Another