Allowed

Mohd. Nadeem v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, U.P. Lucknow

Allahabad HC12 Feb 2024/1489/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court examined a bail application under the NDPS Act where the FIR failed to specify the nature of the recovered powder. Finding no mention of the substance being a notified narcotic and noting the applicant's lack of criminal history, the court granted bail.

What did the court decide?

Applicant Mohd. Nadeem to be released on bail by executing a personal bond with two sureties of like amount each.

Mohd. Nadeem Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home… — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:12371

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1489 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Mohd. Nadeem Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, U.P. Lucknow Counsel for Applicant :- Manoj Kr. Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶6

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

¶7

2. The applicant seeks enlargement on bail in FIR No.536 of 2023, under Section 8/22 of NDPS Act, P.S. Mandiyaon, District Lucknow.

¶8

3. In terms of the FIR it was alleged that on the basis of information received, a search was carried out and two gas cylinders and some powder weighing about 80 gms from the left pocket of the trouser worn by the applicant, were allegedly recovered. In the entire FIR, there is no mention of the nature of the powder and whether the same is notified under the NDPS Act or not. The criminal antecedents have been duly explained in para 22 of the bail application.

¶9

4. Learned AGA has opposed the bail application.

¶10

5. Considering the fact that primarily there is no mention of the nature of the powder allegedly recovered and whether the same is a narcotic or psychotropic substance defined under the NDPS Act or not, a case for bail is made out. As such, the applicant, who is in custody since 05.10.2023 and has no criminal history is entitled to be enlarged on bail. In view thereof, the application is allowed.

¶11

6. Let the applicant Mohd. Nadeem be released on bail in aforesaid FIR number on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of court concerned with the following conditions:

¶12

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

¶13

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

¶14

¶15

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.

¶16

Order Date :- 12.2.2024 nishant

¶17

Digitally signed by :- NISHANT MOHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Mohd. Nadeem v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, U.P. Lucknow

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Nadeem v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, U.P. Lucknow

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Satyam Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Civil Secrett. Lko. and 3 Others

Bhola Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.

Faiyyaz Vs the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Govt. Civil Sectt. Lko.

Piyush Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Sectt. Lko

Irshad @ Chikna Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. (Home), U.P. Lucknow

Smt. Kamla Devi Vs the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow