In a bail application under the U.P. Gangster Act, the court granted bail despite the executive nature of the offence. The applicant was directed to furnish a personal bond and two local sureties and abide by specific conditions regarding court appearances and evidence.
Released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties.
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. - 35834 of 2019
Applicant :- Gautam Jatav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Badan Maurya Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.
Learned counsel for the applicant is permitted to make necessary corrections in the prayer clause.
Heard Sri Ram Badan Maurya, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri P.K. Shahi, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record of the present bail application.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant – Gautam Jatav with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.1211 of 2018, under Section 2/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Kotwali, District Mainpuri.
It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this 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 only one case is shown against the accused applicant, which is as follows :-
"(i) Case Crime No.911 of 2018, under Section 60 of Excise Act and Sections 272, 273, 420 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali, District Mainpuri."
It is argued that the applicant has been granted bail in the case mentioned in the gang chart. Copy of bail order is annexed as Annexure 3 of the affidavit filed in support of bail application. It is next contended that there is no possibility of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and he is languishing in jail since 29.08.2018. Accordingly, he requests for bail.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. for the State has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant, but he could not dispute the factual submissions as urged by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Considering the nature of the offence, provision for initiation of
cases and release 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 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 aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:-
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
Order Date :- 14.10.2019 Anand Sri./-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant should be released on bail under the U.P. Gangster Act furnished with personal bond and sureties.
Whether conditions stating the applicant shall not seek adjournments and must appear for evidence can be imposed.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Dataram Singh vs. State of U.P. and anotherExplained¶14
(2018) 3 SCC 22 · Who else cites this
5 provisions across 3 enactments
Gautam Jatav
Manju Rani Chauhan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
