Allowed

Suraj Kumar v. State of U.P.Thru. Prin. Secy. Home,Civil Sectt. U.P. Lko.

Allahabad HC24 Jun 2024BAIL/6077/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application under Section 8/21 NDPS Act; the court found non-compliance of Section 50 unexplained by the State, criminal history unrelated to NDPS, and prolonged custody, and granted regular bail without commenting on merits.

What did the court decide?

Applicant Suraj Kumar released on bail on personal bond and two sureties, with four specified conditions including no evidence tampering and presence at charge-framing and Section 313 CrPC statement.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:44068

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6077 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Suraj Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.Thru. Prin. Secy. Home,Civil Sectt. U.P. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Shyam Narayan,Manas Gaurav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶6

Rejoinder affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶7

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

¶8

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release the applicant on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 23 of 2024, under Section 8/21 N.D.P.S. Act, P.S.-Subeha, District - Barabanki.

¶9

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that there is clear cut non-compliance of Section 50 of the NDPS Act. He further submits that there is criminal history of the applicant of one case, that too does not pertain to the NDPS Act and the same is explained in paragraph 17 of the bail application. Adding to his argument he submits that the applicant is in jail since 27.01.2024 and he undertakes that in case, the applicant is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty and will co-operate in the trial proceedings.

¶10

Per contra, learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of bail and submitted that the applicant is involved in committing the aforesaid offence and there is criminal history of the applicant of one case and thus he is not entitled to be released on bail.

¶11

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of material placed record, it transpires that there is noncompliance of Section 50 of the NDPS Act and that too could not be satisfactorily explained in the counter affidavit filed by the State. Further there is a case criminal history which does not pertain to the NDPS Act; and the applicant is languishing in jail since 27.01.2024.

¶12

Considering the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.

¶13

Let the applicant- Suraj Kumar involved in the aforementioned crime 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:-

¶14

(1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial;

¶15

(2) 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. He 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;

¶16

(3) 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.; and

¶17

(4) 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, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶18

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

¶19

It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case.

¶20

Order Date :- 24.6.2024 Vipul

¶21

Digitally signed by :- VIPUL PRATAP GOGAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Suraj Kumar v. State of U.P.Thru. Prin. Secy. Home,Civil Sectt. U.P. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suraj Kumar v. State of U.P.Thru. Prin. Secy. Home,Civil Sectt. U.P. 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

Lal Babu vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Dheeraj Kumar Upadhayay @ Baba vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Dinesh Tiwari vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Smt. Jyoti Maurya Thru. Her Husband Sri Himanshu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

Digvijay Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Vijaya Nand Maurya and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. U.P. and Another