Allowed

Nardev v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC13 Jul 2018BAIL/18101/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 18101 of 2018, the Court allowed bail to Nardev charged under the U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act. The applicant, in custody since March 2018, claimed false implication.

What did the court decide?

Bail allowed with personal bond and two sureties on strict conditions including appearance in court and no tampering with evidence or witnesses.

Nardev Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 41 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 18101 of 2018 Applicant :- Nardev Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mrityunjay Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,R.K.R.Sharma,Rajesh Kumar Roy Sharma

¶2

Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.

¶3

List has been revised. No one is present on behalf of the complainant.

¶4

Today the date is fixed for hearing peremptorily.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that according to gang chart, three cases had been shown against accused applicant and he is on bail. The applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. Six criminal cases have been explained. He is languishing in jail since 29.3.2018 (near about three and half months) and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial. It is further submitted that no bail cancellation application has been moved till today regarding the cases shown in the gang chart.

¶7

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid fact as argued by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶8

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, provision for initiation of cases and release of the accused in U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶9

Let the applicant Nardev involved in Case Crime No. 893 of 2017, under Section 2/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Bannadevi, District - Aligarh be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:

¶10

The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶11

The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶12

The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶13

The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶14

The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶15

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.

¶16

Order Date :- 13.7.2018/OP

Nardev v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nardev v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Asif Qurashi Vs State of U.P.

Balveer Vs State of U.P.

Deepanshu @ Dollar Vs State of U.P.

Pushpendra Sharma@Pusi Vs State of U.P.

Harish Vs State of U.P.

Anil Yadav @ Patti Vs State of U.P.