In this bail application under the U.P. Gangsters Act, the High Court observed that despite the applicant filing bonds and not contesting the proceedings, he remained un-bailed and was commanded for production under Article 21 of the Constitution and reliance on Dataram Singh.
The applicant was commanded to be produced in this Court soon.
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. - 35405 of 2020
Applicant :- Hamid Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vivek Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Gautam Chowdhary,J.
orZeku nkf.Md izdh.kZ tekur izkFkZuk i=] vkosnd gkfen dh vksj ls eq0v0la0 362 lu 2020] vUrxZr /kkjk 2/3 U.P. Gangsters & Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act 1986, Fkkuk Hkjouiqj] ftyk esjB 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 nf’kZr oknksa esa 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 vkosnd funksZ"k gS rFkk og bl izdj.k esa fn0 6&9&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
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 % 5&11&2020 ds0lh0flag
2 of 2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant must be produced before the High Court despite having filed bail bonds and not being on bail in a criminal matter.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and anotherApplied¶9
Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 · Who else cites this
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Hamid
State of U.P.
Gautam Chowdhary
Other
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
