Allowed

Pappu v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC25 Sept 2019BAIL/23593/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal miscellaneous bail application under the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, the Court allowed bail, directing the accused to furnish sureties and comply with conditions to prevent tampering with evidence or witnesses during the trial. The order mandated the trial court to conclude the proceedings within one year.

What did the court decide?

Accused-applicant released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties subject to standard conditions regarding trial conduct and prevention of tampering with witnesses.

Pappu Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 75

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 23593 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Pappu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pradeep Kumar Tiwari,Dinesh Chandra Pandey,Surya Pratap Singh Parmar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajendra Kumar-IV,J.

¶5

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

¶6

Accused-applicant, involved in Case Crime No. 1367 of 2018, under Section 2/3 of Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Dhoomanganj, District Allahabad, applied for bail.

¶7

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 30.10.2018. 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. Applicant explained his criminal history by filing supplementary affidavit.

¶8

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 three cases against him, as shown in gang chart.

¶9

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.

¶10

Accordingly, bail application is allowed .

¶11

Let applicant-Pappu be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable

¶12

sureties and filing an undertaking to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:-

¶13

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

¶14

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.

¶15

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

¶16

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.

¶17

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. Order Date :- 25.9.2019

¶18

Akram

Pappu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pappu 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

Rahul Vs State of U.P.

Pankaj Gihar Vs State of U.P.

Jubair Vs State of U.P.

Vikas Vs State of U.P.

Bharat Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Ratan Singh Vs State of U.P.