The High Court granted bail to the applicant under the U.P. Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, relying on the Supreme Court decision in Dataram Singh (2018) 3 SCC 22, due to lack of evidence against the applicant.
The applicant was released on bail with the directions set forth in paragraphs 10-17 of the judgment.
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. - 91
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30880 of 2020
Applicant :- Chotey Alias Jagdev Prasad Verma Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Raja Ram Kushwaha Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Gautam Chowdhary,J.
orZeku nkf.Md izdh.kZ tekur izkFkZuk i=] vkosnd NksVs mQZ txnso izlkn oekZ dh vksj ls eq0v0la0 140 lu 2020] vUrxZr /kkjk 2(b)(i)/3 U.P. Gangsters & Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act 1986, Fkkuk fcokj] ftyk gehjiqj esa tekur ij eqDr djus gsrq izLrqr fd;k x;k gSA
vkosnd ds fo}ku vf/koDrk ,o a fo}ku vij 'kkldh; vf/koDrk dks lquk rFkk i=koyh dk ifj’khyu fd;kA
vkosnd ds fo}ku vf/koDrk us rdZ izLrqr fd;k fd vkosnd dks bl izdj.k esa jaft’ku >wBk QWlk;k x;k gS] mlus dfFkr vijk/k dkfjr ugha fd;k gS] vkosnd ds fo:) xSax pkVZ 4 dsl nf’kZr fd, x, gSa ftuesa mldh tekur Lohd`r gks pqdh gS] Li"Vhdj.k 'kiFki= esa fn;k x;k gS] vkosnd fdlh xSax dk yhMj ;k lnL; ugha gSA mudk ;g Hkh dFku gS fd bl izdj.k esa lg vfHk;qDr jksfgr flag mQZ cmvk dh tekur tekur vkosnu i= la0 27658 lu 2020 esa blh U;k;ky; ds vkns’k fn0 3&11&2020 }kjk Lohdkj dh tk pqdh] vkosnd funksZ"k gS rFkk og bl izdj.k esa fn0 18&8&2020 ls dkjkxkj es a fu:) gS] blfy, vkosnd dks tekur ij NksM+ fn;k tk;] tekur ij eqDr gksus ds i’pkr~ vkosnd Qjkj ugha gksxk vkSj u gh vfHk;kstu lkf{k;ksa dks izHkkfor djsxkA
fo}ku vij 'kkldh; vf/koDrk us vkosnd ds tekur dk fojks/k fd;kA
i=koyh ij miyC/k lkjoku rF;ksa] Hkkjrh; lafo/kku ds vuqPNsn 21 ,oa Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 ds izdj.k esa ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; }kjk izfrikfnr vH;qfDr ds n`f"Vxr] okn ds xq.k nks"k ij fcuk dksbZ fVIi.kh fd, gq, vkosnd dks mijksDr of.kZr vijk/k esa lacaf/kr U;k;ky; dh lUrqf"V ij O;fDrxr ca/k&i= ,oa mlh /kujkf’k ds nks izfrHkw izLrqr djus ij fuEufyf[kr 'krksZ ds lkFk tekur ij NksM+ fn;k tk;A
5& vnkyrksa ds lkekU; dkedkt ds cgky gksus rd vkosnd dks fcuk fdlh tekur ds futh eqpyds ij tekur ij c<+k;k tk,xkA vnkyr ds lkekU; dkedkt cgky gksus ds ckn vkjksih ,d eghus ds Hkhrj vnkyr dh larqf"V ds izfrHkqvksa dks izLrqr djsxkA
6& ikVhZ mPp U;k;ky; bykgkckn dh vkf/kdkfjd osclkbV ls MkmuyksM fd, x, bl rjg ds vkns’k dh daI;wVj tfur izfrfyfi nk;j djsxhA
7& lacaf/kr U;k;ky;@izkf/kdj.k@vf/kdkjh] mPp U;k;ky; bykgkckn dh vkf/kdkfjd osclkbV ls vkns’k dh ,slh dEI;wVjhd`r izfr dh lR;rk dh iqf"V djsxk vkSj fyf[kr :i ls bl rjg ds lR;kiu dh ?kks"k.k djsxkA
mijksDr 'krksZ esa ls fdlh ds mYya?ku ds ekeys esa] ;g tekur jn~n djus dk vk/kkj
gksxkA
fn0 % 10&11&2020 ds0lh0flag
2 of 2
2 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted under U.P. Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 in light of the Supreme Court judgment in Dataram Singh.
Whether the applicant alleged acquaintance with the accused, committed the offence, or acted as an abettor or aider.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and anotherRelied on¶9
Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another, (2018) 3 SCC 22 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Chotey Alias Jagdev Prasad Verma
Gautam Chowdhary
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
