Allowed

Satish Chandra Chauhan v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC9 Jan 2023BAIL/53741/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge observed that mandatory provisions of NDPS Act were not complied with, no independent witness to recovery existed, and co-accused was on bail. Without commenting on merits, enlarged applicant on bail on personal bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on personal bond and two sureties subject to appearance, no tampering with evidence, and no pressurizing witnesses.

Satish Chandra Chauhan Vs State of U.P. — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 75

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 53741 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Satish Chandra Chauhan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Hemant Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Vikas Sahai, learned A.G.A. for the State-opposite party.

¶6

The instant bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 376 of 2022, under Sections 8/20 of the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, Police Station Kopa Ganj, District Mau during the pendency of the trial.

¶7

It is contended that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. False recovery of 27.200 kg. Ganja has been shown from the applicant. There is no independent witness to the recovery. The mandatory provisions of N.D.P.S. Act have not been complied with. There is no FSL report to establish that the substance recovered is Ganja. While weighing the recovered substance, the police has weighed it along with packet, in which they were kept. The police has deliberately shown the quantity of the alleged narcotics substance higher in order to add to the gravity of the offence. No accurate scientific instruments were used for weighment. It is next contended that co-accused Santosh Jaiswal has been granted bail by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 45872 of 2022 (Santosh Jaiswal v. State of U.P.) vide order dated 17.10.2022. The criminal history of the applicant has been explained in Paragraph-13 of the affidavit. The applicant is in jail since 01.09.2022 having no criminal history and in case she is enlarged on bail, she will not misuse the said liberty.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶9

Having regard to the submissions made but without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶10

Let the applicant- Satish Chandra Chauhan, involved in the aforesaid case, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal

¶11

bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned subject to the conditions that he:

¶12

shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court;

¶13

shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; and,

¶14

shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.

¶15

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

¶16

Order Date :- 9.1.2023 SKT/-

¶17

Digitally signed by :- SHIVA KANT TIWARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Satish Chandra Chauhan v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satish Chandra Chauhan 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

Alauddin Vs State of U.P.

Vishal Sharma Vs State of U.P.

Anuj Singh Vs State of U.P.

Vinay Alias Bhoora Vs State of U.P.

Mohammad Danish and Another Vs State of U.P.

Alam Vs State of U.P.