Allowed

Jaihind Rajpoot v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC1 Nov 2023BAIL/44876/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this bail application under Sections 8/20 NDPS Act, the applicant argued innocence and non-compliance with Section 50 of the NDPS Act. The High Court allowed bail without commenting on merits, permitting release on personal bond and two sureties with conditions to appear and not tamper with evidence.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail with a personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions of appearance and non-tampering with evidence.

Jaihind Rajpoot Vs State of U.P. — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:211186

¶2

Court No. - 75

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 44876 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Jaihind Rajpoot Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjeev Kumar Khare Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Sharma,J.

¶6

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

¶7

By means of this bail application applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.275 of 2023, under Sections 8/20 NDPS Act, Police Station Kulpahar, District Mahoba, during the pendency of trial.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with a view to cause unnecessary harassment and to victimize him. Learned counsel has stated that the alleged recovered contraband is below the commercial quantity and there is no compliance of mandatory provision of Section 50 of the NDPS Act. There is no chemical analysis report to corroborate the prosecution version. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. There is no previous criminal history of the applicant. There is no likelihood of his abscondence or tampering with the evidence. The applicant is in jail since 11.09.2023. In case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶9

Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the bail application but he could not dispute the submission made above.

¶10

Having regard to the facts, circumstances and the submissions made but without commenting on merits of the case, this Court is of opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶11

Let the applicant - Jaihind Rajpoot , involved in the aforesaid

¶12

case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the conditions that he:

¶13

(i) shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court;

¶14

(ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

¶15

(iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.

¶16

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶17

Order Date :- 1.11.2023 Shahroz

¶18

Digitally signed by :- SHAHROJ ALAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Jaihind Rajpoot v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jaihind Rajpoot 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

Naseem Vs State of U.P.

Dharmendra Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Shyamu Pasi Vs State of U.P.

Vikas @ Gaurav Chauhan Vs State of U.P.

Shahnawaz Urf Pappu Vs State of U.P.

Neeraj Singh Vs State of U.P.