Allowed

Haribabu v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

Allahabad HC15 Mar 2024BAIL/2986/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 2986 of 2024, the Allahabad High Court considered bail for an accused charged under the N.D.P.S. Act for possession of 20g smack. The court held that as the quantity was below commercial limits, Section 37 N.D.P.S. Act conditions did not apply. Finding the accused to be a fit case for bail, the application was allowed with standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

The bail application was allowed and the applicant Haribabu was ordered to be released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties.

Haribabu vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil… — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:22880

¶2

Court No. - 14

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2986 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Haribabu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Raj Ojha Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

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

¶7

The present bail application has been filed by accused-applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No.12 of 2024, under Section 8/21 N.D.P.S. Act, Police Station Jais, District Amethi.

¶8

It is argued that from the personal search of the applicant 20 grams of smack is alleged to have been recovered. The recovered quantity is below commercial quantity. There appears to be noncompliance of Section 50 of N.D.P.S. Act. The applicant has no previous criminal history. Learned counsel also submits that the applicant is in jail since 12.1.2024.

¶9

It is also contended that the recovered contraband is below commercial quantity as provided in the Schedule appended with the N.D.P.S. Act and therefore, the stringent conditions as contained in Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act are not attracted in

¶10

this case.

¶11

It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released on bail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶12

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶13

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the stringent conditions as contained in Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act are not attracted in this case, the applicant is in jail since 12.1.2024, the applicant has no criminal history and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant Haribabu in the aforesaid case crime number, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶14

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶15

(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶16

(iii) 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

¶17

evidence.

¶18

(iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶19

(v) 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.

¶20

(vi) In case the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial 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.

¶21

Order Date :- 15.3.2024 Madhu

¶22

Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Haribabu v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Haribabu v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. 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

Ajeet Kumar Gupta vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Home, Lko.

Ajeet Kumar Gupta vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Ajeet Kumar Gupta vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Home Annexe Bhawan Civil Sectt. Lko

Vijay Kumar Verma vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Acchey Verma @ Akshay vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Brijesh Kumar Awasthi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.