Sunil Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:71436

Court No. - 69

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 2411 of 2025

Applicant :- Sunil Kumar Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Anupam Anand, learned Brief Holder for the State- opposite party, and perused the material placed on record.

¶8

This application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 9 of 2025, under Sections 8, 15, 29 N.D.P.S. Act, Police Station Izzat Nagar, District Bareilly.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The name of the applicant was disclosed by coaccused Devendra Gangwar and Narendra Kumar in the police custody. The said statements insofar as they implicate the applicant are unreliable. The alleged recovery of Ganja was shown from the co-accused, who were arrested at the spot. The seized contraband was below commercial quantity. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. The mandatory provisions of Section 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act have not been complied with. Prior to the present case the applicant does not have any criminal history, however, after his arrest he has been implicated in another case. The details of the said case are mentioned in Paragraph- 2 of the supplementary affidavit. It is next submitted that the investigation is going on and the applicant has apprehension of his arrest in the above mentioned case.

¶10

Learned Brief Holder for the State opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the application for grant of anticipatory bail be confined only till the submission of police report.

¶12

Having regard to the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant, considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicant and, in particular, the fact that the name of the applicant was disclosed by co-accused

¶13

Devendra Gangwar and Narendra Kumar in the police custody; the alleged recovery of Ganja was shown from the co-accused who were arrested at the spot; the seized contraband was below commercial quantity; there is no independent witness to the alleged recovery and the mandatory provisions of Section 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act have not been complied with, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail till the submission of police report.

¶14

In the event of arrest, the applicant- Sunil Kumar Singh be released on anticipatory bail in the aforesaid case crime till the submission of police report, if any, under Section 193 (3) BNSS, on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned with the following conditions:-

¶15

(i) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶16

(ii) 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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶17

(iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if he has passport, the same shall be deposited by him before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned.

¶18

In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.

¶19

The Investigating Officer is directed to conclude the investigation of the present case in accordance with law expeditiously preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of a copy of this order independently without being prejudiced by any observation made by this Court while considering and deciding the present anticipatory bail application of the applicant.

¶20

The applicant is directed to produce a copy of this order before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned within ten days from today, who shall ensure the compliance of present order.

¶21

The application stands disposed of.

¶22

Order Date :- 5.5.2025 SKT/-

¶23

Digitally signed by :- SHIVA KANT TIWARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sunil Kumar Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunil Kumar Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases