Allowed

Rajendra Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Allahabad HC22 Apr 2024/61/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Allahabad (Lucknow Bench) allowed a bail application under the NDPS Act. The court granted bail noting that the drug recovery (80 grams of alprazolam) was below the commercial quantity of 100 grams and custody was for a short duration.

What did the court decide?

The applicant Rajendra Kumar was released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:31238

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 61 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Rajendra Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

¶5

Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Kumar Srivastava,Ashutosh Mishra,Maya Ram Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶7

1 . Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

¶8

2 . The applicant seeks enlargement on bail in FIR No.275 of 2023, under Sections 8/21of the NDPS Act, Police Station Kotwali Tanda, District Ambedkar Nagar.

¶9

3. In terms of the FIR, it was alleged that on the basis of a search allegedly carried out, the applicant was apprehended with 80 grams of alprazolam power from the shirt worn by the applicant.

¶10

4 . The contention of the Counsel for the applicant is that the mandate of Sections 50 and 52-A of the NDPS Act were not complied with in true letter and spirit. He further argues that the recovery is less than the commercial quantity, which 100 grams in the case of alprazolam powder. The criminal history of the applicant has been duly explained and the applicant is in custody since 24.10.2023.

¶11

5 . Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the bail prayer.

¶12

6 . Considering the fact that the recovery is less than commercial quantity and the applicant is in custody since 24.10.2023, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶13

7. Let the applicant Rajendra Kumar be released on bail in the aforesaid first information report number on his furnishing personal bonds and two reliable sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

(c) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any 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.

¶17

Order Date :- 22.4.2024 akverma

¶18

Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Rajendra Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajendra Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Sarik Vs State of U.P.Thru. Secy. Home Lko and 3 Others

Bablu Nishad @ Candy Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Vishnu Kumar Dwivedi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home, Deptt. Lko.

Gulfam vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Rajendra Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Seth vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko.