Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2021
  6. /
  7. January

<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection" class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="13407b727e717b6653407b7a65">[email&#xA0;protected]</a> Singh vs State Of U.P.

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|18 August, 2021

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.279 of 2021, under Section 21/22 of N.D.P.S. Act, P.S. Khair, District Aligarh Learned counsel for the applicant submits that as per F.I.R. version on 02.06.2021 310 diazepam powder alleged to have been recovered from the left pocket of the applicant. He further submits that there is no independent witness of the alleged recovery. The provision of Section 50 of N.D.P.S. Act has not been complied. There is no evidence to link the recovered material to be diazepam. The applicant has not committed the alleged offence. He has been falsely implicated in the present case. Applicant has criminal history one more case which has been explained in para 11 of the affidavit filed in support of bail application. There is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and, in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. It is next contended that the applicant is languishing in jail since 02.06.2021.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant and submits that recovery made from the possession of the applicant, there is no reason to falsely implicate the applicant and applicant has a criminal history of similar nature, therefore, he is not entitled for bail.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, recovered quantity, non-availability of forensic report and ground of non-compliance of mandatory provision, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, the applicant is entitled for bail, let the applicant- Shambhu @ Shiv Singh involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his/her furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions :-
(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he/she will not tamper with the evidence and will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and will cooperate with the trial. The applicant 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.
(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his/her counsel. In case of his/her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him/her under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his/her 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/her, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) 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. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him/her in accordance with law.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
Order Date :- 18.8.2021 Jitendra
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection" class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="13407b727e717b6653407b7a65">[email&#xA0;protected]</a> Singh vs State Of U.P.

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
18 August, 2021
Judges
  • Ali Zamin