Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

MAHENDRA versus STATE OF U.P.

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Mahendra v. State Of U.P. - CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. 16998 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 13751 (19 August 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'ble (Mrs.) Saroj Bala, J.

This is an application for bail moved on behalf of the applicant Mahendra involved in case Crime No. 299 of 2006 under section 8/22 NDPS Act, Police station Islamnagar, district Badaun.

Heard Sri R.P.S. Chauhan, learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA and have perused the record.

The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that compliance of provisions of sections 42, 50 and 57 of NDPS Act was not made. The learned counsel argued that there is no criminal history of the applicant. According to the learned counsel the quantity of smack recovered is less than commercial quantity.

The learned AGA argued that recovery of smack more than small quantity was made from the possession of the applicant and there is sufficient compliance of the mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act.

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

The quantity of smack as disclosed in the recovery memo is about 100 gram. The recovered smack was not weighed on chemical scales. There are no public witnesses to the recovery. In paragraph 13 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application it has been stated that the applicant has no criminal history. In view of these facts, I consider it to be a fit case for bail.

Let the applicant Mahendra involved in case Crime No. 299 of 2006 under section 8/22 NDPS Act, Police station Islamnagar, district Badaun, be enlarged on bail on furnishing personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

D/-19.8.2006

Mahmood-16998-06


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.