SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
PINTU @ PITIYA – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P – Respondent
BAIL 10849/2020



Advocates:
['PRADEEP YADAV', '', 'NITESH KUMAR SINGH', 'G A']

In Chamber

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10849 of

2020

Applicant :- Pintu @ Pitiya

Opposite Party :- State of U.P.

Counsel for Applicant :- Pradeep Yadav,Nitesh Kumar Singh

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.

This bail application has been taken up during lock-down

period as an urgent one.

Perused the records.

The applicant is seeking bail in connection with case crime

no. 109 of 2019, under Section 8 of 20 of Narcotic Drugs

and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, P.S. Ranipur,

District Mau (for short NDPS Act).

The allegation against the applicant in the first information

report is that the applicant was carrying psychotropic

substance in the form ganja to the tune of 1 kg and 800

grams. It has been pleaded that the entire case is planted

one and no recovery has been made from the possession of

the applicant inasmuch as, there is no independent eye

witness account of the recovery. It has been further

pleaded that the prosecution has not complied with the

mandatory procedural requirement of Section 42, 42(1),

42(2) and 50 of the NDPS Act. It has been further pleaded

that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present

case due to ulterior motive. The laboratory report of the

alleged recovery has yet not been received to prosecute the

applicant with the aforesaid charge. Criminal history has

been admitted to the extent stated in the bail rejection

order. The applicant is in jail since 12.07.2019

In view of overall facts and circumstance of the case, the

Court is of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be

admitted to bail.

Accordingly, applicant namely Pintu @ Pitiya is admitted

to bail. Considering the special circumstances of the lock-

down prevailing in the district concerned presently and in

the light of the directions of this Court in PIL No. 564 of

2020 dated 06.04.2020, let the applicant, Pintu @ Pitiya be

enlarged on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his

furnishing a personal bond only to the satisfaction of the

jail authorities, where the applicant is languishing.

It is further provided that this bail order available on the

official website of the High Court will be taken to be the

authentic one.

However, it is further directed that within period of four

weeks from the date of lifting of the complete lock-down

in the District concerned resulting in resumption of normal

functioning of the Courts in that district, the applicant shall

furnish two sureties each of the like amount to the

satisfaction of the court concerned alongwith certified

copy of this order, failing which the bail granted by this

court shall stand cancelled necessitating surrender of the

applicant.

It is further directed that the applicant shall not misuse the

liberty of bail and shall cooperate with the police/

investigating agency.

Office of the Government Advocate is directed to inform

forthwith about this bail order to the the S.P/S.S.P of the

district concerned for necessary information to the jail

authority where the applicant is languishing.

In view of the aforesaid, the bail application stands

disposed of

Order Date :- 30.4.2020

Sanjeev

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top