Allowed

Prashant Paurush v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC18 May 2023BAIL/17988/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Criminal Misc. Bail Application, Single Judge granted bail to an applicant prosecuted under the NDPS Act. The Court relied on the principle of equality between co-accused under Article 14, noting that a co-accused brother facing a higher quantity charge had already been released.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail by furnishing personal bond and two sureties with conditions against tampering, inducement, and criminal activity.

Prashant Paurush Vs State of U.P. — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:109320

¶2

Court No. - 74

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 17988 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Prashant Paurush Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Satyendra Narayan Singh,Vikas Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

Heard Sri S.N. Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Suresh Bahadur Singh, learned AGA-I for the State-respondent.

¶7

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 397 of 2022, under Sections 21/22 NDPS Act, Police Station- Hathras Gate District- Hathras, during pendency of the trial in the court below.

¶8

This is the second bail application filed on behalf of the applicant. The first bail application of the applicant has been rejected by this bench vide order dated 30.1.2023.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant and his brother Akash were apprehended and it is alleged that from the possession of applicant 800 gm. Diazepam powder was recovered and from the possession of co-accused Akash i.e. brother of the applicant 1150 gm. Diazepam powder was recovered and after rejection of the first bail application of the applicant, the bail application of co-accusd Akash has been allowed by the coordinate bench of this Court on 22.3.2023 and bail order of coaccused Akash has been annexed as Annexure No. 3 to the affidavit.

¶10

He further submitted that at the time of granting bail to coaccused Akash the co-ordinate bench of this Court duly considered the provisions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act. He further submitted that as case of applicant is even at better footing than co-accused Akash, therefore, applicant may also be released on bail.

¶11

Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the first bail application of the applicant has been

¶12

dismissed by this Court after considering the entire facts of the case including provisions of Section 37 of NDPS Act and at the time of granting bail, this fact was not disclosed to the co-ordinate bench of this Court and therefore, merely on the ground of parity, applicant should not be released on bail.

¶13

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

¶14

From the perusal of the record, it appears that first bail application of the applicant has been dismissed by this bench vide order dated 30.1.2023 and thereafter co-accused Akash, who is the brother of the applicant, has been released on bail by co-ordinate bench of this Court on 22.3.2023 and from the possession of coaccused Akash 1150 gm. Diazepam powder was recovered while from the possession of applicant 800 gm. Diazepam powder was recovered, therefor, it appears that from the possession of coaccused Akash more quantity of Diazepam was recovered than applicant.

¶15

In the case of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. CBI & others reported in [MANU/SC/0851/2022] in paragraph no. 73 Apex Court categorically observed that all the accused persons should be treated equally and while deciding bail application of co-accused persons Court must consider the provisions of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

¶16

As bail of co-accused has been allowed after the rejection of the first bail application of the applicant and case of applicant is even at better footing than the case of co-accused Akash, therefore, considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil (supra), in my view applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶17

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed .

¶18

Let the applicant- Prashant Paurush be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶19

(i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted.

¶20

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make inducement,

¶21

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 or any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶22

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.

¶23

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.

¶24

It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.

¶25

Order Date :- 18.5.2023

¶26

KK Patel

¶27

Digitally signed by :- KRISHN KANT PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Prashant Paurush v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prashant Paurush 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Brijesh Vs State of U.P.

Rajesh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ankit Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Gopal Singh Chauhan @ Gopi Vs State of U.P.

Arjun Vs State of U.P.and 3 Others

Aryan Singh Vs State of U.P.