Allowed

Ikrar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC18 Jan 2023BAIL/53796/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed a bail application under Sections 21/22 of the NDPS Act. The court relied on arguments regarding planted evidence, lack of independent witnesses, inaccurate weighing instruments, violation of NDPS search procedures, the applicant's clean record, and lack of flight risk.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail subject to a personal bond and two sureties, with conditions to not tamper with evidence, influence witnesses, and appear before the trial court on fixed dates.

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

¶1

Court No. - 74

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 53796 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Ikrar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vishal Agarwal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit filed by the applicant is taken in the record.

¶6

By means of this bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No.363 of 2022 at Police Station-Hathras Gate, District-Hathras under Sections 21/22 of the NDPS Act. The applicant is in jail since 21.10.2022.

¶7

The bail application of the applicant was rejected by learned trial court on 16.11.2022.

¶8

The following arguments made by Shri Vishal Agarwal, learned counsel on behalf of the applicant, which could not be satisfactorily refuted by Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. from the record, entitle the applicant for grant of bail: (1). 800 gram Diazepam was planted on the applicant to implicate him in this case to burnish the credentials of the police authorities.

¶9

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

¶10

(3). The quantity of the prohibited substance is

¶11

exaggerated as inaccurate instruments have been used for weighment. The recovered substance is in fact below the commercial quantity notified under the NDPS Act.

¶12

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

¶13

(5). The applicant does not have any criminal history apart from the instant case.

¶14

(6). 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.

¶15

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

¶16

Let the applicant- Ikrar 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:-

¶17

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

¶18

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

¶19

Order Date :- 18.1.2023 Ashish Tripathi

¶20

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

Ikrar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ikrar 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

Tahir Shekh Vs State of U.P.

Akil Vs State of U.P.

Yogendra Vs State of U.P.

Khem Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Govind Vs State of U.P.

Bhanu Dubey Vs State of U.P.