Allowed

Krishna v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC31 Jul 2023BAIL/54484/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal miscellaneous bail application, the Allahabad High Court allowed the release of Krishna on bail. The court held that the failure of the Gazetted Officer to sign the recovery memo violated Sections 50 and 51 of the NDPS Act. Following precedent, the court concluded that the prosecution might fail to establish the offence and granted bail with specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail under Sections 8/21/29/60(3) NDPS Act on personal bonds and two sureties, subject to conditions regarding attendance, non-reoffending, and non-interference.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:153136

¶2

Court No. - 75

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 54484 of 2022

¶4

Applicant :- Krishna Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Chandra Shekhar Kushwaha,Amrendra Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶6

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

¶7

2. The FIR in question was lodged alleging that on a search carried out from three accused, 500 grams smack each was recovered from the accused including the applicant, out of which 5 grams each were drawn as a sample and were sent for testing.

¶8

3. The counsel for the applicant argues that there was no following of the mandate of Section 50 of the NDPS Act as the Gazetted Officer has not signed the recovery memo. He further argues that drawing of 5 grams of sample is contrary to the standing order which requires at least 24 grams to be sent as sample. He further argues that the applicant has no criminal antecedents. He relies upon the order passed by this Court in the case of Wahid Ali vs. NCB, Bail Application No. 13590 of 2021 dated 12.07.2023. Thus argues that the applicant should be enlarged on bail as he is in custody since 02.11.2022 and has no criminal history.

¶9

4. Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the bail prayer.

¶10

5. Considering the submission made at the bar, prima facie the recovery memo has not been signed by the Gazetted Officer, thus, there is a clear violation of mandate of Section 50 read with Section 51 of the NDPS Act and Section 100 Cr.P.C. and thus, the prosecution may not be able to establish the offence at the time of trial. Considering the law laid down in the case of Mohd Muslim @ Hussain vs State (NCT of Delhi); 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 260 , I have reasons to believe that the applicant may not be held guilty of the offence in question. As the applicant has not criminal history the second of the twin conditions under Section 37 NDPS Act is also satisfied. The applicant is in custody

¶11

since 02.11.2022 and there is nothing on record to demonstrate that the applicant if enlarged on bail, would in any way adversely affect the trial and without expressing any opinion on merit, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶12

6. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶13

7. Let the applicant- Krishna be released on bail in Case Crime No.404 of 2022, under Section 8/21/29/60(3) NDPS Act, Police Station- Sarsawa, District- Saharanpur on his furnishing personal bonds and two reliable sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

¶14

(a) The applicant shall execute a bond to undertake to attend the hearings;

¶15

(b) The applicant shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused or suspected of the commission; and

¶16

(c) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶17

Order Date :- 31.7.2023 Kalp Nath Singh

¶18

Digitally signed by :- KALP NATH SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Krishna v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Krishna 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pramod Goel Vs State of U.P.

Ranjeet Nishad @ Pappu Nishad Vs State of U.P.

Bijli Nat Vs State of U.P.

Deepak @ Hapar Vs State of U.P.

Atul Singh @ Bachcha Singh Vs State of U.P.

Indrajeet @ Neetu Vs State of U.P.