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

Anas vs State Of Uttar Pradesh

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|21 May, 2021
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 6
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 18871
of 2021
Applicant :- Anas
Opposite Party :- State Of Uttar Pradesh Counsel for Applicant :- Ayub Khan,Amir Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.
Heard Sri Amir Khan, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A for the State through video conferencing mode.
A first information report was lodged against the applicant as Case Crime No. 792 of 2020 at Police Station- Sikandrabad, District- Bulandshahr on 13.10.2020, under Sections 21/22 N.D.P.S. Act.
The bail application of the applicant was rejected by learned Special Judge (N.D.P.S. Act)/Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.6, Bulandshahr, on 31.03.2021.
The applicant is in jail since 13.10.2020, pursuant to the said F.I.R.
Sri Amir Khan, learned counsel for applicant contends that applicant does not have any criminal history and has been falsely implicated in this case. False recovery of 120 grams of Alprazolam tablet has been shown from the applicant. The commercial quantity as notified in law for the aforesaid substance is 100 grams. Weighment of the seized substance Alprazolam was not made by accurate scientific instruments. The weight of the seized substance as stated in the F.I.R. is unreliable. Recovery has been made is violation of Section 50 of N.D.P.S. Act. Lastly, it is submitted by Sri Amir Khan, learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant shall not abscond, and will fully cooperate in the criminal law proceedings. The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence nor influence the witnesses in any manner.
Learned A.G.A. could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.
Courts have taken notice of the overcrowding of jails during the current pandemic situation (Ref.: Suo Motu Writ Peition (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.
I see merit in the submissions of the learned counsel for the applicant and accordingly hold that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.
In the light of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant Anas be released on bail in Case Crime No. 792 of 2020 at Police Station- Sikandrabad, District- Bulandshahr, under Sections 21/22 N.D.P.S. Act on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below. The following conditions be imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either through his counsel or personally as and when directed by the learned trial court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him in accordance with law.
(ii) 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 C r.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 in accordance with law.
(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial, the trial court in order to secure his presence may issue a proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. In case the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
(v) The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.
(vi) 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 :- 21.5.2021 AK Pandey
Digitally signed by Justice Ajay Bhanot Date: 2021.05.23 15:35:52 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

Anas vs State Of Uttar Pradesh

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
21 May, 2021
Judges
  • Ajay Bhanot
Advocates
  • Ayub Khan Amir Khan