Dismissed

Adil Khan v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC7 Feb 2023BAIL/3080/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal bail application under Sections 8 and 20 of the NDPS Act, the single judge dismissed the plea for bail as no fresh grounds were made out. However, expressing dissatisfaction at the slow pace of the trial, the court directed the trial court to conclude the trial within one year, imposed coercive measures on witnesses, and mandated fortnightly progress reports to the District Judge to

What did the court decide?

Application dismissed; trial directed to conclude within one year with directives for witness coercion and fortnightly reporting.

Adil Khan Vs State of U.P. — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 74 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3080 of 2023 Applicant :- Adil Khan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vipul Kumar Dubey,Prabhakar Awasthi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶2

By means of the bail application, the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No.302 of 2021 at Police Station-Kokhraj, DistrictKaushambi under Sections 8/20 of the NDPS Act. The applicant is in jail since 16.06.2021.

¶3

The first bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court on 03.06.2022.

¶4

This is the second bail application. No fresh ground for bail is made out at this stage.

¶5

The bail application is dismissed.

¶6

The Court would like to express dissatisfaction at the pace of the trial.

¶7

Interest of justice will be served by directing the learned trial court to expedite the trial and conclude it within a stipulated period of time.

¶8

The trial court is directed to conclude the trial within a period of one year from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. The learned trial court shall proceed with the trial on a day to day basis to

¶9

ensure that the above stipulated timeline of one year is strictly adhered to. All witnesses and counsels are directed to cooperate with the trial proceedings.

¶10

The learned trial court shall promptly take out all strict coercive measures against all the witnesses in accordance with law who fail to appear in the trial proceeding. Counsels or parties who delay or impede the proceedings should not only be discouraged from doing so but in appropriate cases exemplary costs should also be imposed on such parties/ counsel.

¶11

Police and administrative authorities of the State are also directed to ensure that the coercive measures adopted by the court are promptly executed to ensure the presence of the witnesses on the appointed date before the trial court.

¶12

The trial judge shall submit a fortnightly report on the progress of trial and the steps taken to comply with this order to the learned District Judge, Kaushambi.

¶13

A copy of this order be communicated to the learned trial judge through the learned District Judge, Kaushambi by the Registrar (Compliance) by FAX.

¶14

Order Date :- 7.2.2023 Ashish Tripathi

¶15

Digitally signed by :- ASHISH NAYAN TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Adil Khan v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Adil Khan 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shiv Sankar Alias Shankar Vs State of U.P.

Abhishek @ Shivam Vs State of U.P.

Pramod Mandal Vs State of U.P.

Sohit Vs State of U.P.

Sani Gupta @ Saini @ Ayush Vs State of U.P.

Abbas Ali Vs State of U.P.