Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

VIMLESH versus STATE OF U.P.

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Vimlesh v. State Of U.P. - CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. 22657 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 18931 (8 November 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 Vimlesh involved in case Crime No. 471 of 2006 under section 18/20 of N.D.P.S. Act, Police station Babina, district Jhansi.

Heard Sri Lal Chandra Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA and have perused the record.

The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that compliance of mandatory provisions of section 50 of N.D.P.S. Act was not made and there are no public witnesses to the recovery. The learned counsel argued that  the quantity of recovered  charas is less than the commercial quantity and there is no  previous criminal history of the applicant under the NDPS Act.

The learned AGA  argued that  the applicant is a men of criminal antecedents and recovery of charas more than small quantity was made from the possession of the applicant.

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

The quantity of recovered charas has been shown as about 600 gram in the recovery memo. The recovered charas was not weighed on chemical scales. The quantity of recovered  charas being less than the commercial quantity, I consider it to be a fit case for bail.

Let the applicant Vimlesh involved in case Crime No. 471 of 2006 under section 18/20 of N.D.P.S. Act, Police station Babina, district Jhansi, be enlarged on bail on furnishing personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

D/- 8.11.2006

Mahmood-22657-06


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.