Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SUBHASH versus STATE OF U.P.

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Subhash v. State Of U.P. - CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. 12303 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 11295 (11 July 2006)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Hon. (Mrs.) Saroj Bala, J.

This is an application for bail moved on behalf of the applicant Subhash arraigned in case Crime No. 499 of 2004 under section 18/20 NDPS Act, Police station Modinagar, district Ghaziabad.

Heard Sri B.N. Singh Rathor, learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA and have perused the record.

Recovery of about 250 gram heroine is said to have been made from the possession of the applicant. About 500 gram heroine was also recovered from the desk board of car in which the applicant and co-accused were traveling. The car was said to be  stolen property.

The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that co-accused Meenu has been granted bail by this Court by an order 28.2.2006 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 12166 of 2006 and the case of the applicant stands at par with him. The learned counsel submitted that the applicant has been discharged by Special Judge NDPS Act for the offences punishable under section 41/102 Cr.P.C. and sections 411 and 414 I.P.C.  relating to the recovery of car in which the applicant and co-accused are said to have aboard at the time of recovery of contraband. The learned counsel urged that the quantity of heroine seized is not mentioned after weighment. The learned counsel contended that there are no criminal antecedents of the applicant.

The learned AGA submitted that recovery of 250 gram heroine from the possession of each of the two accused persons and 500 gram from the desk board was made. According to the learned counsel the recovery of heroine more than small quantity was seized from the possession of the applicant and co-accused.

I have taken into consideration the submissions advanced on behalf of both the parties.

There are no public witnesses to the search and seizure. The applicant is in jail for more than two years. Quantity of heroine has not been mentioned in the recovery memo after weighment. In view of these facts, I consider it to be a fit case for bail.

Let the applicant Subhash arraigned in case Crime No. 499 of 2004 under section 18/20 NDPS Act, Police station Modinagar, district Ghaziabad, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

D/-11.7.2006

Mahmood-12303-06


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.