The Single Judge allowed the bail application of the applicant charged under the U.P. Gangsters and AntiSocial Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, directing him to furnish a personal bond and two sureties.
The applicant was released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties subject to specified conditions.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 75
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 26679 of 2019
Applicant :- Bavruddin Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajiv Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishna Pratap Singh,J.
Applicant - Bavruddin seeks bail in Case Crime No.0321 of 2019, under Section 2/3 of U.P. Gangsters and AntiSocial Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police StationQuarsi, District- Aligarh.
Heard Sri Rajiv Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Nitin Agarwal, learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.
It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that according to the gang chart the applicant is said to have been involved in two criminal cases in which he has already been enlarged on bail by the court concerned. He has falsely been implicated in the present case due to police rivalry. He is not a member of any gang. It has been further submitted that there is nothing on record to show that applicant has gained any undue temporal pecuniary material for himself or any other person by Gangster and Anti Social Activities acts. It is also submitted that there is no report of District Magistrate/Special Court on record regarding acquisition of any movable or immovable property by the applicant. It was next submitted that the provisions of the Act has been used against the applicant
like a weapon to harass and intimidate the innocent applicant. There are no chance of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the prosecution evidence. The applicant is languishing in jail since 11.06.2019. In case he is enlarged on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by contending that the applicant is a member of gang and habitual of committing crime. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar anti-social activities and will misuse the bail by extending threat and intimidation to the prosecution witnesses.
Considering the submission of learned counsel for the parties, facts of the case, nature of allegation and period of custody, gravity of offence, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits, let the applicant- Bavruddin involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that :-
without seeking any adjournment.
It may be observed that in the event of any breach of the aforesaid conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to proceed for the cancellation of applicant's bail.
Order Date :- 5.7.2019 Zafar
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the bail application of the applicant charged under the U.P. Gangsters and AntiSocial Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 should be allowed.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Bavruddin
Krishna Pratap Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
