Allowed

Vikas v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC13 Jan 2023BAIL/54905/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A single bench allowed a bail application under Section 8 and 21 of the NDPS Act. The court found arguments regarding planted evidence, lack of independent witness, and violation of search procedures satisfactorily supported the grant of bail without delving into the merits of the case.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail by personal bond and two sureties under imposed conditions of not tampering with evidence and appearing before the trial court.

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

¶1

Court No. - 74

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 54905 of 2022 Applicant :- Vikas Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Abhishek Kumar Shukla,Ram Krishna Mishra,Sujeet Verma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶4

By means of this bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Case No. 488 of 2022 at Police Station- Masoori, District- Ghaziabad under Section 8/21 of the NDPS Act. The applicant is in jail since 04.07.2022.

¶5

The bail application of the applicant was rejected by learned trial court on 29.09.2022.

¶6

The following arguments made by Sri Vishnu Pandey, learned counsel holding brief of Sri Abhishek Kumar Shukla, learned counsel on behalf of the applicant, which could not be satisfactorily refuted by Sri Paritosh Kumar Malviya, learned AGA-I from the record, entitle the applicant for grant of bail:

¶7

(1). 115 gm. Alprazolam was planted on the applicant to implicate him in this case to burnish the credentials of the police authorities.

¶8

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

¶9

(3). The recovered substance is in fact below the commercial quantity notified under the Act.

¶10

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

¶11

(5). The applicant has explained his criminal history. Learned AGA points out that the applicant has not disclosed criminal history of two cases.

¶12

Rejoining the issue and relying on the instructions received by the learned A.G.A., Sri Vishnu Pandey, learned counsel holding brief of Sri Abhishek Kumar Shukla,, learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant is a financially destitute person and has virtually no pairokar to search out the details of his criminal history. But having perused the said history from records of the AGA and on the basis of instructions submits that the applicant belongs to an economically weaker section of the society and has become an easy scapegoat for the police authorities. The police authorities falsely implicated him in the aforesaid cases to show the proficiency of the police investigators. The criminal cases do not have any bearing on the instant case.

¶13

(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.

¶14

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

¶15

Let the applicant- Vikas 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:-

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

Order Date :- 13.1.2023 Pravin

¶19

Digitally signed by :- PRAVIN VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Vikas v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vikas 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

Mursan Vs State of U.P.

Anoop Soni Vs State of U.P.

Miyan Alias Sajid Vs State of U.P.

Chhotak @ Qayum Vs State of U.P.

Dhananjay Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Manoj Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others