Allowed

Sandeep Maurya v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC17 Mar 2021BAIL/10299/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 10299 of 2021, the court considered a bail application under the U.P. Gangster Act. While noting the applicant's claim of innocence and single case involvement, the Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav, J., found it a fit case for bail, imposing conditions to ensure compliance without prejudicing the trial.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail subject to furnishing a personal bond and two sureties with specific undertakings not to tamper with evidence, avoid delays, or commit further crimes.

Sandeep Maurya Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 78

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10299 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Sandeep Maurya Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sudarshan Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

¶5

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

¶6

The applicant- Sandeep Maurya seeks bail in Case Crime No. 251 of 2020, under Section 3(1) U.P. Gangster & Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 at Police Station Ali Nagar, District Chandauli.

¶7

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further contended that only one case has been shown against the accused-applicant in the gang chart. Copy of gang-chart and bail order of this Court have been annexed as Annexure Nos. 2 and 3 respectively to the bail application. The applicant is in jail since 25.11.2020.

¶8

Per contra, learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant but could not point out anything material to the contrary.

¶9

Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, perusal of 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. However, any observation made hereinabove, will not affect the trial of the case.

¶10

Let the applicant- Sandeep Maurya , involved in the above mentioned 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 which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶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.

¶15

The identity, status, and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the Court concerned.

¶16

Order Date :- 17.3.2021 SY

Sandeep Maurya v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sandeep Maurya 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Triveni Prasad and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Manoj Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P.

Nausad Khan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ramanand Vs State of U.P.

Munna Gupta@ Munna Mohammad Vs State of U.P.

Kali Alias Gaurav Vs State of U.P.