Allowed

Rahul v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC7 Apr 2021BAIL/16355/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted bail in a bail application preferred under the U.P. Gangster Act, noting the accused is already on bail in other cases within the same gang chart. Bail granted on personal and surety bonds with conditions against criminal activity and witness tampering.

What did the court decide?

Accused released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount subject to standard conditions.

Rahul Vs State of U.P. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 86

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16355 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Rahul Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajeev Kumar Rai Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Subhash Chand,J.

¶5

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

¶6

This bail application has been preferred by the accusedapplicant, Rahul, who is involved in Case Crime No. 286 of 2020, under Section 2/3 U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, P.S.- Jewar, DistrictGautambudh Nagar.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that in the gang chart three cases have been shown against the applicant and in all the cases applicant is on bail. Copies of the bail orders have been annexed as Annexures-3 to 5 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 19.02.2021.

¶8

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

¶9

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.

¶10

Let applicant, Rahul , 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 court concerned with the following conditions.

¶11

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

¶12

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

¶13

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

¶14

(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.

¶15

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.

¶16

Order Date :- 7.4.2021 Prajapati

Rahul v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul 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

Pintu Chauhan Vs State of U.P.

Dharmendra Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Nusrat Ali @ Patriya Vs State of U.P.

Mahtab Ahmad Vs State of U.P.

Abdul Hamid Vs State of U.P.

Manshad Vs State of U.P.