Allowed

Jeetu Singh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC31 Oct 2019BAIL/45463/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under the U.P. Gangster and Ante Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, the Hon'ble Single Judge released the applicant on personal bond and two local sureties, subject to strict conditions regarding attendance and conduct during trial.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail with personal bond and two local sureties, subject to conditions of attendance and undertaking not to seek adjournments.

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

¶1

Court No. - 75

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 45463 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Jeetu Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.

¶5

Heard Mr. Rajesh Dwivedi, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Ashwani Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the State as well as perused the material on record.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant-Jeetu Singh with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in C ase Crime No. 364 of 2019, under Section 3 (1) of the U.P. Gangster and Ante Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police StationMangalpur, District-Kanpur Dehat, during the pendency of the trial.

¶7

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, only one case is shown against the accused-applicant. It has further been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has already been enlarged on bail in the said case mentioned in the gang-chart, copy of the bail order has been enclosed as Annexure No. 3 to the affidavit accompanying the bail application. It has further been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that apart from criminal case mentioned in the gang chart, applicant has no other criminal criminal history. 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. The applicant is in jail since 17th September, 2019.

¶8

Per contra learned A.G.A. 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.

¶9

Considering the the nature of the offence, provision for initiation of cases and release the accused under the U.P. Gangster and Ante Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 , 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 Versus 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:-

¶10

(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.

¶11

(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.

¶12

(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.

¶13

(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.

¶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

(Manju Rani Chauhan, J.)

¶16

Order Date :- 31.10.2019

¶17

Sushil/-

Jeetu Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jeetu Singh 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

Kapil Deo Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Sajid Vs State of U.P.

Madan Prasad Jaiswal Vs State of U.P.

Upendra Kumar @ Chandu Vs State of U.P.

Sunil Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Krishna Kant Rai Vs State of U.P.