Allowed

Varun Gupta v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC14 Feb 2023BAIL/55299/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a bail application filed by Varun Gupta, a co-accused in a drug case involving Sections 8, 20, 25, 29, and 60(3) of the NDPS Act. The court held that the absence of drug recovery, the inadmissibility of certain statements, and weak prosecution evidence entitled the applicant to bail.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount.

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

¶1

Court No. - 74

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 55299 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Varun Gupta Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Somya Chaturvedi,Sr. Advocate Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶5

By means of the the bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No.120 of 2022 at Police Station-Kotwali, District-Lalitpur under Sections 8, 20, 25, 29, 60(3) of NDPS Act. The applicant is in jail since 07.10.2022.

¶6

The bail application of the applicant was rejected by learned trial court on 15.11.2022.

¶7

The following arguments made by Shri Gopal Swaroop Chaturvedi, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Ms. Somya Chaturvedi, learned counsel on behalf of the applicant, which could not be satisfactorily refuted by Shri Paritosh Kumar Malviya, learned AGA from the record, entitle the applicant for grant of bail:

¶8

(1). No narcotic drugs or prohibited substance were recovered from the applicant.

¶9

(2). The applicant was nominated in the statement of a co-accused made before the police authorities. The said statement was made while he was in the police custody. The said statement insofar as it implicates the applicant is not admissible in evidence.

¶10

(3). Even as per the prosecution case other evidences in the nature of Whatsapp message are "suspected message." Suspicion howsoever grave, is no substitute for evidence.

¶11

(4). Even if the message is taken on its face value, they do not in any manner depict Hawala transactions which can be connected with this offence.

¶12

(5). Prosecution evidence does not connect the applicant with the offence.

¶13

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

¶14

(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.

¶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- Varun Gupta 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

¶18

influence any witness during the trial.

¶19

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

¶20

Order Date :- 14.2.2023 Dhananjai

¶21

Digitally signed by :- DHANANJAI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Varun Gupta v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Varun Gupta 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

Ajay Rao Vs State of U.P.

Lalit Rajbhar Vs State of U.P.

Salman Vs State of U.P.

Puneet Tiwari Vs State of U.P.

Pooja Shukla and 3 Others Vs Vijay Kumar Tiwari and 2 Others

Jahageer Vs State of U.P. and Another