Allowed

Savej v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC5 Apr 2021BAIL/14571/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal bail applicant Savej applied for bail in a case under the U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities Act. The single judge, without expressing an opinion on merits, held it as a fit case and granted bail on personal bond and sureties with standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on personal bond and two reliable sureties to the satisfaction of the court concerned with specified conditions.

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

¶1

Court No. - 86

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14571 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Savej Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sikandar Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Subhash Chand,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit filed today by learned counsel for the applicant. The same is taken on record.

¶6

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

¶7

This bail application has been preferred by the accusedapplicant, Savej, who is involved in Case Crime No.162 of 2020, under Section 2/3 U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, P.S.- Ramghat, DistrictBulandshahr.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that in the gang chart two cases have been shown against the applicant and in both the cases applicant is on bail. Copies of the bail orders have been annexed as Annexure- 3 to the affidavit. It has also been submitted that the applicant is not involved in any anti social activities and he has been falsely implicated. The copy of the gang chart has been annexed as Annexure- 2 to the affidavit. The accused-applicant is in jail since 23.10.2020 as averred in para 11 of the affidavit filed in support of bail application.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail.

¶10

Considering and keeping in mind the nature of accusations, the nature of evidence in support thereof, the severity of punishment which conviction will entail, the character of the accused-applicant, circumstances which are peculiar to the accused, reasonable possibility of securing the presence of the accused at the trial, reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered with, the larger interest of the public/ State and other circumstances, but without expressing any opinion on the merits, I am of the view that it is a fit case for grant of bail.

¶11

Let applicant, Savej, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the

¶12

court concerned with the following conditions:

¶13

i) The applicant(s) shall not indulge in any criminal activity.

¶14

(ii) The applicant(s) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.

¶15

(iii) The applicant(s) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.

¶16

(iv) The applicant(s) shall regularly appear on the dates fixed by the trial court unless his personal attendance is exempted by the trial court.

¶17

In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, liberty is given to the trial court to cancel the bail of the applicant(s) without any reference to this Court.

¶18

Order Date :- 5.4.2021 PS

Savej v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Savej 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

Jyoti Vs State of U.P.

Abhay Vs State of U.P.

Abhay Vs State of U.P.

Naveendhar Dubey Vs State of U.P.

Rajveer Vs State of U.P.

Mohit @ Sunny Bhadauriya Vs State of U.P.