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

Salman vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|08 April, 2021
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 89
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13351 of 2021 Applicant :- Salman Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Singh Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Heard Mr. Ajay Singh Yadav, learned counsel for applicant and learned A.G.A. for State.
Perused the record.
This application for bail has been filed by applicant, Salman, seeking his enlargement on bail in Case Crime No.565 of 2020, under sections 8/22 N.D.P.S. Act, P.S.- Ghaziabad Kotwali, District- Ghaziabad, during pendency of trial.
Record shows that in respect of an incident, which is alleged to have occurred on 25.08.2020, a delayed F.I.R. dated 25.08.2020 was lodged by first informant, S.I. Sanjeev Kumar and was registered as Case Crime No.565 of 2020, under sections 8/22 N.D.P.S. Act, P.S.- Ghaziabad Kotwali, District- Ghaziabad. In the aforesaid F.I.R., applicant- Salman has been nominated as solitary named accused.
Learned counsel for applicant contends that applicant is innocent. He has been falsely implicated in the present case. The alleged recovery of 21.69 gram Alprajolam has been falsely planted on applicant. However, same is below commercial quantity. There is no independent witness of the alleged recovery and the compliance of provisions of section 50 N.D.P.S. Act has not been made. Apart from this, there are four other cases mentioned against applicant and in all the cases, he has been enlarged on bail. Applicant is in custody since 25.08.2020. In case applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer of bail.
Having heard learned counsel for applicant, learned A.G.A. for the state and upon perusal of material brought on record, nature of offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and larger mandate of Article 21 of the Constitution of India and dictum of Apex Court in Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 but without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that applicant has made out a case for bail. Accordingly, bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant- Salman, be released on bail in Case Crime No.565 of 2020, under sections 8/22 N.D.P.S. Act, P.S.- Ghaziabad Kotwali, District- Ghaziabad on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to following conditions:-
(i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence.
(ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.
(iii) The applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities.
(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever.
The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.
Order Date :- 8.4.2021 Saif
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

Salman vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
08 April, 2021
Judges
  • Rajeev Misra
Advocates
  • Ajay Singh Yadav