Allowed

Arjun Singh @ Fantu v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC11 Feb 2020CRLR/300/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court allowed the revision in a bail matter under the Gangster and Anti-social Activities Prevention Act. The impugned orders rejecting bail were set aside, and the revisionist was directed to be released on bail with personal and heavy sureties.

What did the court decide?

Revisionist to be released on bail by furnishing personal bond and two heavy sureties of not less than rupees one lac each.

Arjun Singh @ Fantu Vs State of U.P. and… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 78

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 300 of 2020

¶3

Revisionist :- Arjun Singh @ Fantu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Vishnu Murti Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Om Prakash-VII,J.

¶5

Counter affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶6

Learned counsel for the revisionist states that he will not file rejoinder affidavit in the matter.

¶7

This revision under section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 is directed against the order dated 23.11.2019 passed by I Addl. Sessions Judge / Special Judge, POCSO Act, Kaushambi in criminal appeal no.39 of 2019 and order dated 12.11.2019 passed by Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Kaushambi in case crime no.160 of 2016 under section 2/3 U.P. Gangster and Anti-social Activities (Prevention) Act, Police Station Manjhanpur, District Kaushambi whereby the application for bail of revisionist Arjun Singh @ Fantu was rejected.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶9

Submission of learned counsel for the revisionist is that revisionist was in jail in another case. During that period, on 25.4.2016, the first information report was lodged in this matter. Offence under section 2/3 U.P. Gangster and Anti-social Activities (Prevention) Act is not attracted against the revisionist. It is further submitted that in all the cases shown in the gang chart, either the revisionist is on bail or the cases have been decided. It is further submitted that the revisionist has been declared juvenile in conflict with law. Thereafter, one application was moved before the Juvenile Justice Board for release, which was rejected on 12.11.2019. Thereafter, appeal was preferred before the Sessions Judge concerned, which was also dismissed on 23.11.2019 on insufficient ground. Revisionist is in jail in this matter since 14.6.2018. All the co-accused named in the present matter have already been released on bail. There is no possibility that in future revisionist will indulge in criminal activities. It is further argued that the revisionist has attained majority.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer.

¶11

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing the parties, keeping in view the entire facts and circumstances of the case as also the observations recorded by the Juvenile Justice Board as well as lower appellate court and also keeping in view this fact that in all the cases shown in the gang charge / criminal history, either the revisionist has been enlarged on bail or the same have been decided.

¶12

Revision, having substance, is liable to be allowed and the impugned orders passed by the Juvenile Justice Board as well as Appellate Court are

¶13

liable to be set-aside.

¶14

Revision is allowed. Order dated 12.11.2019 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board and order dated 23.11.2019 passed by I Addl. Sessions Judge / Special Judge, POCSO Act are set-aside.

¶15

Revisionist Arjun Singh @ Fantu son of Ganga Prasad Singh, resident of Village – Bamrauli, Police Station Dhata, District Fatehpur involved in case crime no.160 of 2016 under section 2/3 U.P. Gangster and Anti-social Activities (Prevention) Act, Police Station Manjhanpur, District Kaushambi be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties (not less than rupees one lac) each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

¶16

Order Date :- 11.2.2020

¶17

Arjun Singh @ Fantu v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arjun Singh @ Fantu v. State of U.P. and Another

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

Hukum @ Hukumi Vs State of U.P. and Another

Yashpal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Balveer Vs State of U.P. and Another

Arjun and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Satish @ Rinku Vs State of Up and Anr.

Tribhuwan Pal Vs State of U.P. and Another