Allowed

Sangam Gaur v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC15 Apr 2020BAIL/12062/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal bail application, the High Court of Allahabad granted bail to the applicant, Sangam Gaur, under the UP Gangster Prevention Act. The court noted no evidence of organized gang membership and released him on a personal bond with conditions.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

Sangam Gaur Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

In Chamber

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12062 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Sangam Gaur Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Bipin Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.

¶5

This bail application has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.27 of 2020, under Section 3(1) of Uttar Pradesh Gangster & Anti Social (Prevention) Activities Act, 1986, Police Station Khorabar, District Gorakhpur, during pendency of trial.

¶6

According to the gang chart annexed with the First Information Report the applicant is said to have been involved in Case Crime No.770 of 2019 under Sections 364, 302, 201, 120B, 34 IPC, Police Station Khorabar, District Gorakhpur.

¶7

No objection has been filed on behalf of the State.

¶8

It is urged on behalf of the applicant that he has been falsely implicated in the instant case and is not a member of any organized gang. It is also pointed out that the applicant in Case Crime No.770 of 2019 has already been granted bail by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.8576 of 2020 vide order dated 28.2.2020. It is submitted that this Court while granting bail in Case Crime No.770 of 2019 has clearly noticed that the applicant is not even named in the First Information Report and his implication has surfaced on account of confessional statement of co-accused. Submission is that except the aforesaid cases, there is no other criminal history of the applicant and he has been falsely implicated for extraneous reasons. The applicant is languishing in jail since 16.1.2020 and in case he is enlarged on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶9

Perused the record and rejection order passed by the court below. Apart from the implication in the aforesaid cases, there is no other prima facie material disclosed in the First Information Report which may demonstrate that the applicant is a member of any organized gang which is involved in antisocial activities.

¶10

Let the applicant Sangam Gaur involved in aforesaid case

¶11

crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶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

(v) The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.

¶17

(vi) The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.

¶18

(vii) The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶19

In view of the extraordinary situation prevailing in the State due to Covid-19, the directions of this Court dated 6.4.2020 passed in Public Interest Litigation No. 564 of 2020 (In re vs. State of U.P.), shall also be complied.

¶20

The order reads thus:

¶21

"Looking to impediments in arranging sureties because of lockdown, while invoking powers under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, we deem it appropriate to order that all the accused-applicants whose bail applications came to be allowed on or after 15th March, 2020 but have not been released due to non-availability of sureties as a consequence to lockdown may be released on executing personal bond as ordered by the Court or to the satisfaction of the jail authorities where such accused is imprisoned, provided the accusedapplicants undertakes to furnish required sureties within a period of one month from the date of his/her actual release."

¶22

Order Date :- 15.4.2020 Ashok Kr.

Sangam Gaur v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sangam Gaur 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

Shiv Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Rekha Sharma Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Dhirendra Kumar Bind Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Shubham Pal @ Krishna Pal Vs State of U.P.

Akash Solanki Vs State of U.P.

Ajeet Kumar Sharma @ Ranjan Vs State of U.P.