Allowed

Ramu Pasi v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC29 Nov 2018BAIL/45712/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 45712 of 2018, this court granted bail to the applicant under Section 2/3 of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, subject to executing a personal bond and furnishing sureties along with specific conditions regarding attendance at trials and not seeking adjournments.

What did the court decide?

Applicant enlarged on bail on executing personal bond and furnishing two sureties of Rupees one lac each with specific conditions.

Ramu Pasi Vs State of U.P. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 62

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 45712 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Ramu Pasi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Ajay Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that only two cases have been shown against the applicant in the Gang Chart which has been annexed at page-15 of the bail application and in the said cases, the applicant has been granted bail by the competent Court. The applicant is in jail since 10.08.2018.

¶7

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.

¶8

Keeping in view the nature of submissions advanced and the provisions of Section 19 of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, let the applicant- Ramu Pasi involved in Case Crime No.425 of 2018, under Section 2/3 U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Manjhanpur, District Kaushanbi be enlarged on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties (Rupees one lac each) (one should be of a family member) ,with the following conditions:-

¶9

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed 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.

¶10

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶11

(iii) 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 fixed 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.

¶12

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed 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 sufficient 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.

¶13

Order Date :- 29.11.2018 Shahroz

Ramu Pasi v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramu Pasi 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

Guddu Dome Vs State of U.P.

Salman Vs State of U.P.

Suleman @ Khotiya Vs State of U.P.

Munna Vs State of U.P.

Zakir Vs State of U.P.

Waseem Vs State of U.P.