Application for bail filed by two applicants accused under U.P. Gangsters Act. Court found it a fit case for bail considering their release in other pending cases and submission of personal bond and sureties.
Applicants granted bail on furnishing personal bond and two sureties each subject to specified conditions.
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. - 33
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 23271 of 2020
Applicant :- Anoop Kumar Yadav And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ramesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vipin Chandra Dixit,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned AGA for the State respondent.
Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that two cases have been shown against the applicants in the gang-chart and in all the cases, the applicants are on bail. Copies of the bail orders have been annexed as Annexure -3 & 4 to the affidavit filed in support of the bail application. It has also been submitted that the applicants are not involved in any antisocial activities and they have been falsely implicated in the present crime. The copy of the gang-chart has been annexed as Annexure- 2 to the affidavit. It is further submitted that there is no chance of the applicants fleeing away from the judicial process or of tampering with the prosecution evidence. He next submits that the applicants are in jail since 19.11.2019 and if they are released on bail, they will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned AGA for the State vehemently opposed the prayer of bail. However, he does not dispute the fact that the applicants have been granted bail in the cases mentioned in the gang-chart.
Upon hearing the learned counsel for the parties and upon the perusal of the record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment as well as totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage, without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.
Let applicants Anoop Kumar Yadav and Rahul Kumar Yadav be released on bail in Case Crime No. 433 of 2019, under Section 2/3(1) of U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Kotwali, District Ballia on their furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to the following conditions:
(i) The applicants will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complaint in any manner whatsoever.
(ii) The applicants will abide by the orders of the court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.
(iii) The applicants will not indulge in any unlawful activity.
(iv) The applicants will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever.
The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicants to prison. Order Date :- 28.8.2020 P.P.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicants are entitled to bail given their bail status in other gang cases and lack of antisocial activities.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Anoop Kumar Yadav
Rahul Kumar Yadav
State of U.P.
Vipin Chandra Dixit
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
