Allowed

Shoeib and Another v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC22 Feb 2019BAIL/7800/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application for bail by Shoeib and Another in a case involving U.P. Gangsters Act. Court granted bail applying the reformative theory of punishment without determining merits, imposing strict conditions regarding court appearances and prohibition of adjournments.

What did the court decide?

Applicants enlarged on bail on executing personal bond and two sureties of Rs. One Lac each subject to specified strict conditions regarding court attendance.

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

¶1

Court No. - 69

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7800 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Shoeib And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Abrar Ahmad Siddiqui Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Abrar Ahmad Siddiqui, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Sanjay Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicants that applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case and they have not committed the alleged offence. It is next contended that three cases have been shown against the applicants in the Gang Chart and in the said cases, applicants have been granted bail which has been properly explained in paragraph 5 and 6, of the affidavit filed in support of bail application. Further submission is that there is also no possibility of applicant either fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. Applicants who are in jail since 10.8.2018, undertakes that they will not misuse the liberty, if granted.

¶7

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer but has not disputed the aforesaid fact.

¶8

Keeping in view the submissions advanced and the provisions for Section 19 of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act,1986, evidence, complicity of the accused, reformative theory of punishment , and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.

¶9

Let the applicants- Shoeib and Rashid, involved in Case Crime No. 231 of 2018, under Section- 2/3 of U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station- Mirzapur, District- Shahjahanpur, be enlarged on bail on his executing a personal bond and two sureties (Rs. One Lac each) (One should be of a family member) before the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶10

(i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶12

(iii) In case, the applicants misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against

¶13

them, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶14

(iv) The applicants 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.

¶15

If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicants 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 them in accordance with law.

¶16

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.

¶17

Order Date :- 22.2.2019

¶18

ssm

Shoeib and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shoeib and Another 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

Wasim Vs State of U.P.

Narendra Singh Vs State of U.P.

Shanoo Vs State of U.P.

Zahid Vs State of U.P.

Ishak Khan Vs State of U.P.

Yogesh Vs State of U.P.