Sunil Kumar v. State of U.P
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 ss. 8, 20, 37, 37(1)(b)(ii), 41, 50, 52, 52A, 53, 57(2)
- Constitution of India art. 21
- Indian Penal Code, 1860
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ss. 82, 313
Judgment
Considering the facts of the case and keeping in mind the arguments advanced on behalf of the parties, the ratio of the Apex Court's judgment in the case of Union of India vs. Shiv Shankar Keshari, (2007) 7 SCC 798, larger mandate of Article 21 of the constitution of India, the nature of accusations, the nature of evidence in support thereof, the severity of punishment which conviction will the character of the accused-applicant, entail, circumstances which are peculiar to the accused, reasonable possibility of securing the presence of the accused at the trial, reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered with, the larger interest of the public/ State and other circumstances, but without expressing any opinion on the merits, I am of the view that it is a .t case for grant of bail. Let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that :- (i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses. (ii) The applicant shall .le an undertaking to the e>ect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates .xed for evidence when the witnesses are present in Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date .xed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without suAcient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iv) In case the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date .xed 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. (v) The applicant shall remain present in person before the Trial Court on the dates .xed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without suAcient 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. In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be veri.ed by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. Order Date :- 1.8.2022 KS Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — ss. 8, 20, 37, 37(1)(b)(ii), 41, 50, 52, 52A, 53, 57(2); Constitution of India — art. 21; Indian Penal Code, 1860; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — ss. 82, 313.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Allahabad High Court, on 01 Aug 2022. The bench was SIDDHARTH.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No treatment data yet for this judgment in the Courts & Cases corpus.
Absence of data is not a statement about the judgment’s standing — the corpus covers only judgments we index and link with cited evidence.