Allowed

Pradeep v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC17 Oct 2019BAIL/31843/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court grants bail to the applicant in a U.P. Gangster Act case, subject to a personal bond and two sureties. The bail order imposes conditions regarding presence in court, adjournment requests, and potential proceedings for absconding or misusing bail.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail with a personal bond and two sureties subject to specific conditions regarding attendance and adherence to court orders.

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

¶1

Court No. - 75

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31843 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Pradeep Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Chandra Kumar,Dhirendra Kumar Agrahari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.

¶5

Counter affidavit filed by the learned A.G.A. for the State today in the Court, is taken on record.

¶6

Heard Sri Dhirendra Kumar Agrahari, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Prashant Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

¶7

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Pradeep with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 27 of 2019, under Sections 2/3 U.P. Gangster Act & Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act 1986, Police Station- Narsaina, District- Bulandshahar , during pendency of trial.

¶8

It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case for the purpose of harassment. False and fabricated prosecution story has been made by the police. There is no reliable evidence against the applicant. It is next argued that in the gang chart four cases are shown against the accused-applicant. It is further argued that the applicant has already been enlarged on bail in all the above cases, copy of the bail order has been enclosed as Annexure No.3 to the affidavit accompanying the bail application. It is further submitted that except the cases shown in the gang chart, the applicant has no criminal history. The applicant is languishing in jail since 25.07.2019. It is next contended that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶9

Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but he could not dispute the factual submissions as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶10

Considering the nature of offence, provision for initiation of

¶11

cases and release of the accused in U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention Act), material/evidence brought on record, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties as well as the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid case crime 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, subject to the following conditions that :-

¶12

(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.

¶13

(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.

¶14

(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.

¶15

(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.

¶16

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.

¶17

Order Date :- 17.10.2019 JK Yadav

Pradeep v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pradeep 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Villa @ Saif Vs State of U.P.

Jogendra Singh Vs State of U.P.

Yogendra Kushwaha Vs State of U.P.

Karan Singh @ Karna Vs State of U.P.

Sanu Vs State of U.P.

Rakesh @ Keshari Yadav Vs State of U.P.