Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2016
  6. /
  7. January

Faujdar Mohd. @ Sonu vs State Of U.P.

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|25 May, 2016

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No. 308 of 2016, under Section 8/20 N.D.P.S. Act, police station GRP Mugalsarai, District Chandauli with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.
I have perused the prosecution story as set up in the FIR and also the bail rejection order.
The contention as raised at the Bar by learned counsel for the applicant is that 5 Kg of Ganza is alleged to have been recovered from the possession of the applicant which is less than the commercial quantity. It is further contended that there is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. It is next contended that the mandatory provisions of the N.D.P.S., Act has not been complied with. It is also contended that the applicant is in jail since 23.3.2016 and in case, he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, at this stage, prima facie, a case for bail has been made out. However, the said prima facie view will not in any manner adversely affect the case of the prosecution.
The prayer for bail is granted. The application is allowed.
Let the applicant Faujdar Mohd. @ Sonu involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned subject to the following conditions:
1. The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
2. The applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.
3. The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial Court.
4. That the applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected of the commission of which he is suspected.
5. That 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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, it is open to the opposite party to approach this Court for cancellation of bail.
Order Date :- 25.5.2016 Kuldeep
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

Faujdar Mohd. @ Sonu vs State Of U.P.

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
25 May, 2016
Judges
  • Vipin Sinha