Allowed

Jitendra Singh @ Joti v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC23 Sept 2019BAIL/12770/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court allowed bail application filed by applicant Jitendra Singh under Section 2/3 of U.P. Gangster Act. Court imposed conditions regarding sureties, non-tampering, cooperation with trial, and prohibition of further criminal activities.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on personal bond and two sureties subject to undertakings and conditions regarding trial conduct and trial timeline.

Jitendra Singh @ Joti Vs State of U.P. — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 75

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12770 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Jitendra Singh @ Joti Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Umesh Panday,Ghanshyam Das Mishra,Manish Joshi

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Rajendra Kumar-IV,J.

¶6

Parcha filed by Sri Manish Joshi, Advocate and supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of applicant, are taken on record.

¶7

Heard Sri Manish Joshi, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for State and perused the material available on record.

¶8

Accused-applicant, involved in Case Crime No.61 of 2018, under Section 2/3 Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Puranpur, District Pilibhit, applied for bail.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case on account of enmity for the purpose of harassment. Applicant committed no offence. A false and fabricated story has been set up by the police. He further submits that in all cases shown in gang chart against the accused-applicant, he has been released on bail. Applicant is in jail since 31.03.2018. It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. Criminal history of the applicant has been explained in paragraph no.9 of the affidavit filed in support of bail application.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but did not dispute the factual submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant and submitted that applicant is a member of gang, having eighteen cases against him, as shown in gang chart.

¶11

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, rival contention of learned counsel for the parties, detention of applicant in jail, severity of punishment in case of conviction, number of cases shown in gang chart and without commenting upon the merit of the case, applicant deserves bail.

¶12

Accordingly, bail application is allowed.

¶13

Let applicant Jitendra Singh @ Joti be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties and filing an undertaking to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:-

¶14

The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

¶15

The applicant shall co-operate with the trial and shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for charge, evidence when the witnesses are present in the court, statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and argument.

¶16

During trial, he shall not indulge in any criminal activities or case.

¶17

In breach of any condition enumerated above, Trial Court shall be at liberty to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

¶18

However, it is provided that Trial Court shall expedite and conclude the trial within one year from the date of production of certified copy of this order without granting unnecessary adjournment, if there is no legal impediment.

¶19

Order Date :- 23.9.2019 I.A.Siddiqui

Jitendra Singh @ Joti v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jitendra Singh @ Joti 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

Subhan Vs State of U.P.

Virendra Arya Vs State of U.P.

Rajesh Bhardwaj and Another Vs State of U.P.

Kapil @ Sintu Vs State of U.P.

Ranjay Kumar Maurya Vs State of U.P.

Reshma Vs State of U.P.