Allowed

Jakir @ Chhammu v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC1 Feb 2023BAIL/3699/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court heard a bail application in an NDPS case where the applicant alleged false implication and procedural violations. The court allowed bail without adjudicating on the merits of the allegations, imposing standard conditions including personal bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail with personal bond and two sureties each; conditions imposed regarding testimony and court appearance.

Jakir @ Chhammu Vs State of U.P. — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 74

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3699 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Jakir @ Chhammu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rakesh Kumar Verma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶5

By means of this bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 271 of 2022 at Police Station-Chhajlet, District-Moradabad under Sections 8/20 of the NDPS Act. The applicant is in jail since 18.12.2022.

¶6

The bail application of the applicant was rejected by learned trial court on 11.01.2023.

¶7

The following arguments made by Sri Pawan Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel holding brief of Sri Rakesh Kumar Verma, learned counsel on behalf of the applicant, which could not be satisfactorily refuted by Shri Chandan Agrawal, learned AGA from the record, entitle the applicant for grant of bail:

¶8

(1). The applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case.

¶9

(2). 175 grams Charas was planted on the applicant in this case to burnish credentials of the police authorities.

¶10

(3). There is no independent witness to the recovery.

¶11

(4). The commercial quantity of Charas as notified under the NDPS Act is 1 Kg. The recovered substance

¶12

is below the said quantity.

¶13

(5). The search and seizure has been made in violation of the mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act.

¶14

(6). The applicant has explained his criminal history. It is also contended that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the said cases. The applicant belongs to poor economic strata of the society and is convenient scapegoat for the police authorities. The applicant has never misused the liberty of bail granted in the said cases. The said cases do not have any bearing on the instant bail application.

¶15

(7). The applicant is not a flight risk. The applicant being a law abiding citizen has always cooperated with the investigation and undertakes to cooperate with the court proceedings. There is no possibility of his influencing witnesses, tampering with the evidence or reoffending.

¶16

In the light of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed.

¶17

Let the applicant- Jakir @ Chhammu be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below. The following conditions be imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶18

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence or influence any witness during the trial.

¶19

(ii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶20

Order Date :- 1.2.2023 Kirti

¶21

Digitally signed by :- KIRTI SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Jakir @ Chhammu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jakir @ Chhammu 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

Joni Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Reshma Vs State of U.P.

Pankaj Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Ashish Sharma Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sanju Rajbhar Alias Sanjay Rajbhar Vs State of U.P.

Kamil Vs State of U.P.