Allowed

Sonu v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC17 Apr 2023BAIL/7881/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Hon'ble High Court of Allahabad allowed bail application of Sonu charged under Sections 8/22 NDPS Act. Court held applicant made out case for bail citing Section 50 non-compliance and co-accused bail order, imposing conditions on personal bond and appearance.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail with personal bond and two sureties each in like amount subject to specific attendance and invocation conditions.

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

¶1

Court No. - 86 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7881 of 2023 Applicant :- Sonu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Kartikey Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶2

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶3

Supplementary affidavit filed by the learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

¶4

Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶5

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive, on the basis of false and planted recovery of 130 grams heroin has been recovered from the possession of the applicant and there is no public witness of the alleged recovery. It is further contended that mandatory provision of Section 50 of N.D.P.S Act has not been complied with. It is further submitted that co-accused Yogesh Gautam has already been granted bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court and the order is annexed at page no. 34 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application. At the stage of consideration of bail it cannot be decided whether offer given to the applicant and his consent obtained was voluntary. These are the questions of fact which can be determined only during trial and not at the present stage. In case of prima facie non-compliance of mandatory provision of Section 50 of N.D.P.S. Act, the accused is entitled to be released on bail within the meaning of Section 37 of N.D.P.S. Act. The applicant has explained his criminal history in para 7 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application. It is also submitted that the applicant is in jail since 26.03.2022 and he undertakes that he will not misuse liberty, if granted.

¶6

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre-trial stage who is involved in supplying contraband, therefore, the applicant does not deserve any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activity. The "reasonable grounds" mentioned in Section 37(1)(b)(ii) of NDPS Act mean something more than prima facie ground. It implies substantial probable causes for believing that accused is not guilty of the offence charged and points to existence of such facts and circumstances which are sufficient to hold that accused is not

¶7

guilty.

¶8

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of accused and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and the law laid down by the Apex Court in Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. C.B.I. & Another, passed in S.L.P.(Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021 , the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶9

Let the applicant Sonu involved in Case Crime No. 125 of 2022, under Section 8/22 of N.D.P.S. Act, Police Station Vrindavan, District Mathura, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following condition:-

¶10

(i) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code;

¶11

(ii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶12

(iii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶13

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶14

Order Date :- 17.4.2023

¶15

Bhanu

¶16

Digitally signed by :- BHANU PRATAP KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sonu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sonu 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

Mushtaque Alam Vs State of U.P.

Sagar Dom Vs State of U.P.

Amit Solanki Vs State of U.P.

Rajeev Kumar Gupta Vs State of U.P.

Man Singh @ Raja Vs State of U.P.

Rajendra Patel Vs State of U.P.