Allowed

Ram Karan v. State of U.P through Its Principal Secretary (Home) at Lko.

Allahabad HC10 Feb 2023BAIL/54940/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court granted bail to an NDPS applicant who alleged that drug quantity was planted, search violated statutory provisions, and there were no independent witnesses. The court allowed the petition without adjudicating the merits of the substantive charges.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail with personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions against tampering and presence in court.

Ram Karan Vs State of U.P through Its Principal Secretary… — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 74

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 54940 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Ram Karan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P Through Its Principal Secretary (Home) At Lko.

¶4

Counsel for Applicant :- Rahul Mishra,Sanjay Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶6

By means of this bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 770 of 2022 at Police StationBanda, District-Shahjahanpur under Sections 8/18 of the NDPS Act. The applicant is in jail since 20.09.2022.

¶7

The bail application of the applicant was rejected by learned trial court on 10.11.2022.

¶8

The following arguments made by Shri Sanjay Mishra, learned counsel on behalf of the applicant, which could not be satisfactorily refuted by Shri Markandey Singh, learned AGA from the record, entitle the applicant for grant of bail:

¶9

(1). 2 kg 610 grams Opium was planted on the applicant and another co-accused to implicate him in this case to burnish credentials of the police authorities. Rs. 250 was also recovered from the applicant.

¶10

(2). There is no independent witness to the

¶11

recovery.

¶12

(3). Money belongs to the applicant.

¶13

(4). The recovered quantity from each accused is 1 kg 305 gram which is less than the notified commercial quantity under the NDPS Act.

¶14

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

¶15

(6). The applicant does not have any criminal history apart from this case.

¶16

(7). 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.

¶17

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

¶18

Let the applicant- Ram Karan 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:-

¶19

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the

¶20

evidence or influence any witness during the trial.

¶21

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

¶22

Order Date :- 10.2.2023 Vandit

¶23

Digitally signed by :- VANDIT AGRAWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ram Karan v. State of U.P through Its Principal Secretary (Home) at Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Karan v. State of U.P through Its Principal Secretary (Home) at Lko.

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

Noor Mohammad Vs State of U.P.

Rahul Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Kuldeep Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajkumar @ Chhotu Vs State of U.P.

Ammu Vs State of U.P.

Pravesh Vs State of U.P.