Allowed

Mohd Subhan v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC17 Jul 2019BAIL/28369/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Bench granted bail to Mohd Subhan, an applicant in a criminal proceeding under the UP Gangsters and Anti Social Activities Act, 1986, conditioning release on furnishing a personal bond, two sureties, and specific undertakings regarding the innocence of the case, non-indulgence in criminal activities, and cooperation with the trial.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail with a personal bond and two sureties, subject to specific conditions of conduct and trial cooperation.

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

¶1

Court No. - 75

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 28369 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Mohd Subhan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Afzal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Krishna Pratap Singh,J.

¶5

Heard Mr. Mohd. Afzal, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. Shiv Kumar Singh, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶6

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case with some ulterior motive. It is further contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that according to gang chart, only one case has been registered against the applicant, in which the applicant has been enlarged on bail. It has also been submitted that there is nothing on record to show that applicant has gained any undue temporal pecuniary material or any other advantage for himself or any other person by gangster and anti social activities acts. It is next submitted that there is no report of District Magistrate/Special Court on record regarding acquisition of any movable or immovable property by the applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the provisions of the Act has been used against the applicant like a weapon to harass and intimidate the innocent applicant. It is next contended that there is no chance of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the prosecution evidence. It is lastly contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is in jail since 15.03.2019 and he is not a previous convict. In case, he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶7

Per contra learned AGA 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 indulge in similar anti-social activities and will misuse the liberty of bail by extending threat and intimidation to the prosecution witnesses.

¶8

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also perusing the material on record, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant Mohd. Subhan, involved in case crime No. 24 of 2019, under section 3(1) of UP

¶9

Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, police station Syohara, district Bijnor be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned on the following conditions that:-

¶10

The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶11

The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court and cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶12

The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶13

However, in the event of any breach of the aforesaid conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to proceed for cancellation of bail of the applicant.

¶14

It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.

¶15

Order Date :- 17.7.2019 Sazia

Mohd Subhan v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd Subhan 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

Yogesh and Another Vs State of U.P.

Mukesh Vs State of U.P.

Rahees Vs State of U.P.

Sri Krishna Vs State of U.P.

Aadil Vs State of U.P.

Harun Vs State of U.P.