Allowed

Mahtab v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC26 Feb 2020BAIL/8513/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail to Mahtab, an applicant accused under the U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities Act, 1986, conditioned on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, verifying identity proofs, and adhering to conditions preventing witness intimidation and further crime.

What did the court decide?

Release of the applicant on bail subject to a personal bond and two sureties, with conditions against witness intimidation, further criminal activity, and requirement to cooperate in the trial sincere

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

¶1

Court No. - 77

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8513 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Mahtab Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Manish Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶6

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 01 of 2020, under Section 2/3 U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, police station Nagina Dehat, district Bijnor during the pendency of trial.

¶7

It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that according to the gang chart the applicant is said to have been involved in one criminal case in which he has already been enlarged on bail by the court concerned, copy of the said order has been brought on record as annexure No. 3 to the application. He has falsely been implicated in the present case due to police rivalry. He is not a member of any gang. There is no prospect of trial of the present case being concluded in near future due to heavy dockets. The applicant is not a previous convict. The applicant is languishing in jail since 16.11.2019 and in case he is enlarged on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶8

Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by contending that the applicant is a member of gang and habitual of committing crime. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar anti-social activities and will misuse the bail by extending threat and intimidation to the prosecution witnesses.

¶9

Having considered the submissions of the parties, without expressing any opinion on the merits, let

¶10

the applicant Mahtab involved in the aforesaid case 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 that :-

¶11

The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶12

The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶13

The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶14

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶15

Order Date :- 26.2.2020

¶16

Sumaira

Mahtab v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahtab 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Samaryab Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rinku Vs State of Up and Another

Manoj Kumar Singh and Anr. Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vajid Ali Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Lalsa Yadav @ Rama Kant Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Asif Vs State of U.P.