Allowed

Ithar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC1 Nov 2019BAIL/45704/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under the U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, the court declined to deny bail. The applicant was allowed to be released on furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties, subject to strict conditions regarding attendance and behavior during the trial.

What did the court decide?

The applicant is released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties of a like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court.

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

¶1

Court No. - 75

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 45704 of 2019 Applicant :- Ithar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pawan Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.

¶4

Heard Sri Pawan Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ashwini Kumar Yadav, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record of the present bail application.

¶5

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant – Ithar with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.370 of 2018, under Section 3(1) of U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Shyamdeurwa, District Maharajganj.

¶6

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, in which the applicant has been granted bail. 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 17.09.2018. Accordingly, he requests for bail.

¶7

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.

¶8

Considering the nature of the offence, provision for initiation of 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 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:-

¶9

(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.

¶10

(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.

¶11

(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.

¶12

(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.

¶13

Order Date :- 1.11.2019 Anand Sri./-

Ithar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ithar 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

Upendra Kumar @ Chandu Vs State of U.P.

Sunil Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Krishna Kant Rai Vs State of U.P.

Nazim Vs State of U.P.

Nisar Ahmad Vs State of U.P.

Anil Kumar Sharma Vs State of U.P.