Allowed

Lalit Bajpai @ Rahul v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lucknow

Allahabad HC16 May 2024BAIL/5293/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail granted to applicant accused under NDPS Act. Recovery was from pocket without independent witnesses, violating Sections 50 and 52-A. Quantity was less than commercial. Applicant in custody since 2022.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted on furnishing personal bonds and two reliable sureties of Rs.20,000/- each with conditions to attend hearings and not tamper with evidence.

Lalit Bajpai @ Rahul vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:47007

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5293 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Lalit Bajpai @ Rahul Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lucknow Counsel for Applicant :- Smriti Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶6

1. Counter affidavit filed today by learned AGA is taken on record.

¶7

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

¶8

3 . In terms of the FIR, it was alleged that on the basis of an information received, search was carried out and from the pocket of the applicant allegedly 180 grams Smack was recovered.

¶9

4 . The counsel for the applicant argues that as the recovery was effected from the pocket, the mandate of Section 50 of the NDPS Act was not followed. The mandate of Section 52-A of the NDPS Act was also not followed and there are no independent witnesses to the search as also the recovery is less than the commercial quantity. The applicant has no criminal history of an offence under NDPS Act.

¶10

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

¶11

6. Considering the fact that the recovery is less than the commercial quantity, there are no independent witnesses to the search, the mandate of Sections 50 & 52-A of the NDPS Act have not been followed, the applicant who is in custody since 22.08.2022 is enlarged on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶12

7. Let the applicant Lalit Bajpai @ Rahul be released on bail in FIR/ Case Crime No. 247 of 2022, under Sections 21/22 NDPS Act, Police Station Achalganj, District Unnao, on his furnishing personal bonds and two reliable sureties of Rs.20,000/- each to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

(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.

¶16

Order Date :- 10.7.2024 Arun

¶17

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

Lalit Bajpai @ Rahul v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lucknow

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lalit Bajpai @ Rahul v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home 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

Vikas Kumar Chawla Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Sant Lal Anticipatory Bail Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Nargis Vs State of U.P. and Another

U.O.I. Diectorate of Revenue Intelligence Thru. M Vs Ashish Gupta

Naseer @ Munnan Vs State of U.P. through the Principal Secretary Home, Civil Secretarial U.P. Government Lko. and Ors.

Anubhav Saxena Minor B.C. Vs State of U.P. and Ors.