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

Amir vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|30 July, 2021
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 71
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16915 of 2021 Applicant :- Amir Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ankit Agarval Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sanjay Singh, learned AGA-I for the State and perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive, on the basis of false and planted recovery of 1800 tablets of alprazolam recovered from the possession of the applicant and there is no public witness of the alleged recovery. It is further contended that mandatory provisions of Section 50 of N.D.P.S. Act has not been complied with. At the stage of consideration of bail it cannot be decided whether offer given to the applicant and his consent obtained by voluntary. These are the questions of fact which can be determined only during trial and not at the present stage. In case of prima facie non-compliance of mandatory provision of Section 50 the accused is entitled to be released on bail within the meaning of Section 37 of N.D.P.S. Act. The applicant has history of six cases, wherein he has been stated to be enlarged on bail. The details of criminal history has properly been explained in paragraph nos.15 of the affidavit filed in support of bail application and paragraph-2 of the supplementary affidavit. It is also submitted that the applicant is jail since 15.2.2021 and he undertakes that he will not misuse liberty, if granted.
Learned counsel appearing for the opposite party vehemently opposed the prayer.
Courts have taken notice of overcrowding of jails during the current pandemic situation (Ref.: Suo Motu Writ Petition (c) No. 1/2020, Contagion of Covid 19 Virus in prisons before the Supreme Court of India). These circumstances shall also be factored in while considering bail applications on behalf of accused persons.
Having heard submissions of learned counsel of both sides, considering nature of accusation, severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, (2018) 3 SCC 22, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.
Let the applicant- Amir involved in Case Crime No. 175 of 2021, under Sections 21/22 of N.D.P.S. Act, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Bulandshahr be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and two sureties of Rs. One Lakh each (one should be of a family member), with the following conditions:
1. The applicant will attend and co-operate the trial proceedings pending before the court concerned on the date fixed after release.
2. He will not tamper with the witnesses.
3. He will not indulge in any illegal activities during the bail period.
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.
It is clarified that the observations, if any, 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 ultimate merits of the case.
The Trial Court shall take endeavour to conclude the trial expeditiously, preferably within six months from the date of production of a copy of this order, if there is no legal impediment.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.
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.
Order Date :- 30.7.2021 Digamber Digitally signed by Justice Vivek Kumar Singh Date: 2021.07.30 17:32:34 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
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

Amir vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
30 July, 2021
Judges
  • Vivek Kumar Singh
Advocates
  • Ankit Agarval